PANTHEISM'S 


DESTRUCTION 


OF 


BOUNDARIES 


By   ABRAHAM    KUYPER,   D.D. 


f 


N 


PANTHEISM'S 

DESTRUCTION  OF 

BOUNDARIES 


BY 

Abraham  Kuyper,  D.D, 

Frkf.  Univkrsity,  Amsterdam,  Holland 


TRANSLATED    BY 


J.  Hendrik'^de  Vries,  M.A, 


Bronxville,    N.  Y. 


(^First publishfii  in  Method! it  Revieiu,  Nrw  York,  July  and  September^  l*93-) 


Copyright,    1893,    by 
J.   HENDRIK  de  VRIES,   M.A. 


-4).  ^ 


Pantheism's  Destruction  of  Boundaries 


Methodist  Review. 


AuT.  IT.  — PANTHEISM'S   DESTRUCTION   OF   BOUNDA- 
RIES.—PAKT  I.* 

It  is  not  our  desire  to  be  classed  \vitli  tliose  wlio  luive  no 
good  word  for  puntlieisui  in  any  form.  The  difference  be- 
tween our  age  and  the  age  which  preceded  it  is  too  deeply 
marked  for  this.  Then  it  was  deism,  cold. and  grave  ;  a  ration- 
alism whicii  withered  the  spirit ;  a  conventional  affectation  on 
every  hand;  a  state  of  society  such  as  exists  in  the  wait- 
ing-room of  the  house  of  one  dead,  inanimate  and  weaned 
from  every  ideal.  In  its  place  we  have  now  an  age  full  of 
animation  and  thrift;  a  inuling  and  a  fermentation  of  all  the 
elements  of  society  ;  a  spirit  to  dai-e  everything,  together  with 
development  of  power  which  is  astonishing.  Were  ours  tlu; 
choice,  therefore,  between  frozen  deism,  which  causes  the  blood 
at  length  to  coagulate  in  the  veins,  and  this  melting  pantheism, 
which  from  the  midst  of  a  tropical  wealth  commnnicates  to  the 
soul  a  thrill  of  its  own  delight,  there  would  be  no  room  for  hesi- 
tation. In  India  we  should  have  been  Buddhists,  and  perhaps 
have  approved  the  Vedas.  In  China  we  should  have  preferred 
the  system  of  Lao-Tse  to  that  of  Confucius,  and  in  Japan  we 
should  have  turned  our  back  upon  the  official  Shinto,  that  wo 
might  share  the  hardships  of  the  oppressed  priests  of  Buddha. 

Fordo  not  forget  that  the  deepest  trait  of  pantheism  consists 
of  a  false  love;  a  love  which,  it  must  be  allowed,  steps  across 
appointed  boundaries,  but  which,  even  in  thisialse  and  unright- 
eous form,  is  born,  nevertheless,  from  the  motive  of  love.  It 
repels  not,  but  it  attracts.  Its  purpose  is  to  unite,  and  not  to  sepa- 
rate. Call  it  spiritual  adultery,  but  adultery,  nevertheless,  born  of 
affectioiuite  inclination,  the  outcome  of  homesickness  and  of  the 
pathos  of  sympathy.  For  all  pantheism  is  religious  pantheism 
at  first,  and  only  later  on  is  cryi-tallizcd  into  a  philosophic  sys- 
tem ;  and  only  by  its  degenerating  effect  does  it  work  its  prac- 

♦  Copyright,  1803,  by  J.  Ilendrik  de  Vries. 

[Tlio  above  nriiele,  althou^li  ii  truiislation,  is  of  such  a  quality  as  to  render  it 
(icsiniblo  for  the  i):i;,ns  of  iho  liiu-iiw.  As  is  well  known,  its  aiiilior  is  u  dislin- 
frnislicii  leader  in  lliu  evan^eliail  oilliodox  inovcment  f)f  the  Reformed  Cimrcli 
in  Ildlland;  and  as  the  article  in  the  orijj:inal  is  accessible  to  bnl  few  American 
readers  we  have  accepted  for  pnblicaliou  the  following  admirable  translation  by 
the  Uov.  Mr.  do  Vriea. — Ki).  ] 


f- 


PantheisirCs  Destruction  of  Boundaries.     ' 

tical  destruction  in  life.  The  soul  seeks  after  God  ;  and  when 
the  light  of  revelation  is  wanting,  and  he  cannot  be  found  by 
the  dusky  glinnnerings  of  reason,  the  soul  becomes  impetuous 
with  longing  and  indiscreet  even  to  the  borders  of  the  irrever- 
ent, and  agonizes  after  Gud,  to  enter  his  presence,  to  fathom 
the  hidden  dei)ths  of  his  being,  and  rests  not  until  it  has  lost 
itself  in  him  or  unconsciously  made  him  become  manifest  in  it- 
self. This  trait,  this  motive,  is  one  and  the  same  all  the  M-orld 
over;  and  whether  you  hear  the  Hindoo  utter  his  heart-break- 
ing cry  after  his  nirvana;  or  whether  you  see  the  Gnostic 
delight  himsblf  in  his  syzygics ;  or  Bohme,  coloring  his  panthe- 
ism with  Christian  tints,  theosophically ;  or  Madame  de  Guyon, 
quietistically ;  and  anon  Schelling,  in  a  philosophic  style,  it  is 
with  them  all  the  one  strong  effort  to  restrain  the  soul  from  its 
impetuous  longings,  to  lose  itself  in  the  depths  of  the  being  of 
God.  Let  ns  call  it  once  more  a  spiritual  adultery ;  but  it  is  the 
glow  of  a  tragic  passion,  which  is  far  more  attractive  and  cap- 
tivating than  the  cold  egotism  of  the  matter-of-fact  man,  wlio 
may  not  question  the  existence  of  God,  but  has  no  further  deal- 
ings with  him  tlian  jpro  Tnemoria.  And  also  in  our  age  it  is 
noteworthy  how  the  newly  aroused  Christian  religion  in  Schleier- 
maclier  has  kissed  the  hand  of  pantheisn),  and  how  Schelling 
(provided  that  the  theistic  name  be  retained)  has  allowed  him- 
self deep  draughts  from  the  foaming  cup>  of  pantheism.  True 
piety  shrank  back  from  the  rationalistic  coldness  and  from  the 
conventional  mechanism  of  our  supranaturalists.  But  at  the 
hand  of  Schelling  it  regains  its  raystei'ies,  its  holy  Triiiit}',  its 
Incarnation,  including  even  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection. 

But,  however  luxuriantly  this  pantheism  grew,  like  grass  in 
prairie  lands,  under  tliat  grass  did  hide  a  poisonous  adder.  That, 
which  in  the  tents  of  the  saints  received  its  corrective  from 
jiiety  itself,  lost  this  corrective  the  moment  it  began  to  sjiarkle 
from  the  philosopher's  desk ;  for  then  philosophic  pantheism 
quickly  repressed  the  religious  element.  "With  Hegel  eveiy 
religious  motive  sank  away  in  dialectics;  and  after  him  the 
spirit  of  our  age  captured  for  itself  the  magic  formula  of  pan- 
theism, in  order  that,  being  freed  from  God  and  from  every  tie 
established  bj^  him,  it  might  melt  the  world  as  it  found  it  and 
cast  it  into  a  new  form  for  every  man  in  accordance  with  the 
desires  of  his  own  heart. 


Methodist  Review. 

Three  motives  siniultimcously  impelled  our  a<^e  in  this  direc- 
tion:  its  overwhc'huin<^  t'cehng  of  power,  its  ex;i^<^erated  sense 
of  human  excellence,  together  witri  its  penetration  into  the 
riches  uf  nature.  In  comparison  with  the  age  whicli  preceded 
it  this  age  feels  like  a  Titan,  who  carries  everything  on  his 
broad  shoulder,  storms  the  heavens,  and  cannot  rest  until  eveiy- 
thing  has  been  put  in  a  new,  that  is,  a  modern,  form.  By 
this  overwhelming  feeling  of  power  its  sons  have  been  aroused 
to  an  impassioned  and  exaggerated  sense  of  human  excellence. 
In  its  thought  man  is  both  alpha  and  omega — an  anthropo- 
theism,  as  some  have  named  it ;  a  worshi])  first  of  the  ideal 
human,  and  then  of  self,  however  cynically  deep  this  brutal 
self  may  have  sunk  below  the  human  ;  an  Ego-theism  which 
extends  to  its  most  repulsive  consequence.  In  the  intoxication 
of  his  passionate  self-esteem  man  cast  himself  with  his  exceed- 
ing power  upon  defenseless  nature,  and  he  has  put  it  under 
foot,  and  ever  since  has  led  it  about  behind  the  triumphal  car 
of  his  science  and  of  his  materiality.  And  these  three  motives 
taken  together,  that  feeling  of  infinite  power,  that  sense  of  self- 
esteem,  and  that  alliance  into  which  the  spirit  of  man  has  en- 
tered with  the  spirit  of  nature,  even  without  the  mention  of 
more  satanic  or  lower  motives,  entirely  explain  the  pantheistic 
keynote  of  our  age.  Hence  it  was  spoken  none  too  boldly 
when,  according  to  the  several  sympathies,  pantheism  was 
praised  as  the  "favorite  sypteni "  of  our  age,  or  condemned  as 
the  "  Iladikalhajresie "  which  now  lifts  its  head ;  or  when  an 
English  pantheist  boastfully  asserted  that  at  least  ninety  out 
of  every  hundred  scholars  of  to-day  were  pantheists,  either 
openly  or  in  secret. 

Let  no  one  think,  however,  that  we  assert  that  philosophic 
])antheism  still  sways  its  scepter  in  the  schools  of  philosophy ; 
for,  with  Haley  excepted,  the  opposite  rather  is  true.  Ilegel 
has  long  been  dethroned,  and  with  this  the  luxurious  growth 
of  systematic  pantheism  has  come  to  a  standstill.  Philosophy 
beholds  her  lecture-halls  deserted.  Her  votaries  groan  on 
every  liand  under  her  Ahgelebtheit,  senility,  and  spiritual  iin- 
l)otence.  Since  new  philosophies  appear  no  more,  as  Erd- 
inann  complains,  the  market  is  flooded  with  "  Philosojihie- 
Geschichte."  Spencer  has  already  exalted  agnosticism  into 
a   system.     The    long-forg(^ttcn    Ilerbart   is   now   conceded   to 


Pa7ithcisins  Destruction  of  Boundaries. 

excel  Ilegel  far  in  wisdom.  The  Neo-Kantiaiis  go  back 
to  Kant ;  a  few  even  to  Leibnitz.  And,  to  show  liow  a 
man  of  a  very  unpoetie  name  may  espy  the  genius  of  the 
spirit  of  poetry,  Professor  Knauer,  of  Vienna,  proclaims  in 
flattering  terms  Hobert  Ilamerling  the  greatest  of  all  philos- 
ophers, by  whose  hand  was  placed  tlio  keystone  in  the  front 
of  her  jxilacc. 

But  M'ith  this  the  teeth  of  the  "ever-gormandizing,  ever- 
ruminating  monster,"  as  Goethe  calls  pantheism,  are  not  yet 
broken.  When  recently,  in  spite  of  the  interdict  of  Van  Roest, 
the  socialists  held  their  electoral  meeting,  they  placed  over 
their  entrance  these  words  of  Opzoomer:  "Every  citizen,  as 
a  member  of  the  commonwealth,  has  a  share  in  sovereignty." 
Call  this  an  abuse,  if  you  will,  of  the  professorial  dictum,  but 
recognize,  at  least,  that  such  is  ever  the  course  of  the  statement 
of  a  principle.  It  goes  out  from  the  desk ;  but  when  in  the 
halls  of  the  philosophers  it  has  long  been  recalled,  or  weiglicd 
and  found  wanting,  it  continues  many  years  in  the  air  of  the 
lower  spheres,  exercises  its  influence  upon  the  special  ecienccs, 
predominates  in  our  text-books,  takes  the  premium  in  our 
novels,  glitters  as  tinsel  in  the  daily  press,  vitiates  the  unction 
of  our  poets,  colors  the  tone  of  conversation  by  Schlagwortcr, 
and,  in  the  circles  of  the  mediocrity,  or  of  what  the  Germans 
call  the  "Philisterthnm,"  it  altogether  subverts  public  opin- 
ion. For  instance,  inspired  by  Broca  and  by  Von  Kiigeli, 
Darwin  admitted  in  the  last  edition  of  his  Descent  of  Man 
and  Origin  of  Species  the  insufficiency  of  his  selection  theory  ; 
but  second-hand  science,  in  text-book  and  ]-)ublic  school,  has 
not  ceased  to  honor  this  defective  selection  theory  as  the 
philosopher's  stone. 

It  means  nothing,  therefore,  that  philosophic  pantheism  lies 
vanquished  at  the  desk  ;  practically  it  works  its  after  effects  with 
no  less  power,  both  in  special  studies  and  real  life.  A  professor 
who  would  still  indorse  the  system  of  Ilogol  as  such  vronld  not 
be  abreast  of  his  times,  and  he  would  be  more  sharply  hit  than 
Ilegel  by  the  irony  of  the  song  : 

And  now  lie  talks  of  God  in  lis, 

Who  never  is  transcendent, 
And  all  his  Iiearcrs  marvel  nnicli 

That  God'a  a  German  slndcnL 


Methodist  Review. 

Or  with  more  fairness,  since  I  n)yself  am  a  professor,  let  me 
turn  the  laufjh  on  tlie  professoiaite,  by  quoting  Goethe's  well- 
tnown  witticism  from  his  "  Xeniun  :  " 

Wlia't  do  I  cnre  for  your  scoff, 

Over  tlio  All  and  the  One ; 
Tlie  profoHSor  is  surely  a  person, 

But  God,  us  surely,  is  none. 

But  the  deadly  effect  of  this  irony  does  not  save  us.  In 
the  place  of  one  prufessorial  head  which  is  struck  off  from  this 
monster  at  the  desk,  a  hundred  other  heads  appear,  all  equally 
poisonous,  in  the  lower  strata  of  society.  Then  we  obtain  de- 
rivative theories,  which  ]\Iarat  rightly  designates  as  doubly 
dangerous,  together  with  their  application,  in  which  the  princi- 
ples themselves  are  passed  by,  or  covered  over,  or  more  often 
not  even  surmised  to  exist  by  those  wlio  write,  or  sjieak,  or  act. 
I>y  way  of  example  lecaU  the  entluisiastic  woi'ship  of  progress. 
lK»wever  much  the  onward  step  has  been  accelerated  there  is 
never  a  res])ite,  never  a  rest,  but  a  life  without  a  Sabl)ath. 
There  is  no  looking  backward  upon  that  which  lias  been  done, 
nor  occu[)aiicy,  much  less  enjoyment,  of  that  which  has  been 
obtained,  i^o  new  point  is  reached  in  the  way,  but  immedi- 
ately a  new  start  is  made  from  it.  It  is  like  the  sansenden 
Gidop  in  the  "Todtcnritt"  of  Burger's  '*  Leonore."  It  is  the 
AVaiidering  Jew  this  time,  because  of  a  passion  which  absorbs 
and  attracts,  and  not  because  of  an  agony  of  fear  which  relent- 
lessly drives  on.  It  goes  ever  forward  and  farther,  ever  hasten- 
ing on  ahead,  an  -Excelsior  which  may  never  end.  And  is  the 
assertion  too  l>old,  that,  of  every  thousand  v.ho  kce]>  pace  as  well 
as  they  can  with  this  hurrying  ])rocession,  no  two  discern  or 
surmisj  the  genetical  coherence  of  this  feverish  progress  with 
tlie  avowed  jiiirpose  of  the  pantheistic  world  ?  That  TruVra 
Ittl  Koi  ovdtv  fitvei"  is  no  longer  put  as  a  pro])osition,  Ijut  taken 
U[)  as  the  life  motto,  until  at  length  the  want  of  an  eternal 
Sabbath  is  predicated  of  God  liimself,  and  he,  too,  as  Svhiiler 
wittily  remarked,  has  been  charmed  into  "a  veritable  God  of 
prouress." 

But  enough  of  this.  ^Vo  were  not  to  treat  of  Pantlieism  in 
general,  but  merely  one  of  its  effects.  Therefore  we  will  not 
even  sketch  hastily  this  grasjvelusive  Proteus,  but  focus  all  our 
*  Everything  is  ia  prf>ccs3  of  becoming,  but  nothing  is. 


Pantheism^ 8  Destruction  of  Boundaries. 

powers  on  tliis  one  point — that  pantheism  effaces  distinctions, 
obscures  boundary  lines,  and  betrays  the  tendency  to  wipe  out 
every  antithesis.  This  tendency  derives  its  impulse  from  th^ 
pantheistic  jn-inciple  itself.  This  is  shown  by  religious  pan- 
theism, which,  afraid  of  a  God  "  afar  off,"  has  no  peace  even 
with  God  "at  hand,"  but  in  the  prayer-mystery  here  seeks  to 
penetrate  the  being  of  God,  and,  in  the  hereafter,  yearns  after 
idcntiticatioa  with  the  divine  Being,  until  at  length  every 
boundary  between  God  and  the  soul  is  lost.  The  same  is  true 
of  i)ractical  pantheism,  which  restlessly  seeks  to  equalize  all 
things  ;  and,  as  long  as  there  is  any  upward  growth,  is  bent, 
first  upon  tying  down,  then  upon  curtailing  and  cutting  off, 
until,  finally,  every  distinction  between  the  cedar  and  the 
hyssop  ceases  to  exist.  But  this  is  most  clearly  demonstrated 
by  philosophical  pantheism,  which  systematically  fuses  every 
thesis  and  antithesis  into  a  synthesis,  and,  by  the  tempting 
notion  of  identity,  explains  everything  which  seems  dissimilar 
as  similar  and,  in  the  end,  as  being  of  like  essence. 

Herein  lies  the  explanation:  This  philosophy  does  not  deal 
with  reality,  but  with  the  image  which  it  saw  reflected  in  the 
mirror  of  its  thought,  or  which,  more  correctly,  it  formed 
for  itself.  Kant  struck  a  blow  for  this  in  proclaiming  that 
reality  escapes  us,  and  that  the  form,  at  least,  and  the  dimen- 
sion of  that  which  we  observe  have  their  rise  in  us.  Then 
came  Fichte,  who  thought  it  better  not  to  reckon  with  that 
which  escapes  us,  and  declared  that  that  which  seemed  the 
image  had  been  imagined  by  ourselves,  and  hence  Avas  the  only 
real.  And  finally  Ilcgel  transposed  everything  which  existed 
into  a  purely  logical  formula,  and,  after  the  object  had  been 
destroyed  together  with  its  image,  asserted  that  the  idea  alone 
remained.  In  this  wise  this  phihisophy,  with  ever  greater  neces- 
sity of  consecpience,  transports  us  from  the  real,  living  world 
into  an  abstract  world  of  thought ;  and  in  this  world,  of  course, 
it  has  free  play  with  every  distinction  and  antithesis.  For  then 
we  deal  no  longer  with  living  ]ierfons,  but  with  heads  sketched 
by  ourselves ;  and  from  these  crayon-sketches  all  sorts  of  lines 
and  wrinkles  may  be  effaced  and  charmed  away  as  by  magic, 
which  from  the  living  face  will  nevermore  depart. 

And  if  pantheism  in  this  wise  creates  for  itself  the  possibility 
of  escape  from  the  dilemma  of  distinctions  which  really  exist, 


Methodist  lieview. 

then  the  very  law  of  thought  compels  it  to  use  this  possibility 
with  ever  greater  prodigality.  Our  thinking  occasions  the 
arrangement  in  a  fixed  order  of  the  phenomena  we  observe. 
Thought,  from  its  very  nature,  demands  system.  He  who 
thinks  looks  for  general  principles  in  particulars,  in  order  to 
ex[)lain  particulars  by  general  principles.  Every  dualism  an- 
tagonizes the  processes  of  thought,  and  tlmught  can  rest 
upon  its  laui'els  only  when  everything  has  been  grouped  under 
one  idea.  If  now  we  deal  with  reality  and  render  homage  t<> 
its  law  of  existence,  then  with  our  mode  of  thinking  we  arc  re- 
])ulsed,  stroke  upon  stroke,  by  that  which  obstinately  resists 
our  generalization.  But  if  we  live  as  the  pantheist  lives,  not 
in  the  real  world,  but  in  a  gallery  of  portraits  which  we 
ourselves  have  i)ainted,  then  of  course  there  is  no  opposi- 
tion; then  we  tolerate  no  obstinate  resistance  from  our  brush 
and  erase  all  lines  which,  as  they  were  drawn,  do  not  fit  into 
our  system. 

Pardon  this  somewhat  dry  demonstration.  It  was  needed  to 
show  the  inner  motive  as  one  of  sheer  necessity,  M'hich  com- 
pels pantheism  everywhere  to  wipe  out  boundary  lines.  De- 
clensitm  and  conjugation  forms  may  remain,  according  to 
Spinoza's  figure  in  grammar,  which  differ  in  time  and  in  mood, 
in  person  and  in  case ;  but  all  these  forms  are  simple  modifica- 
tions of  the  primitive  word,  which  always  remains  the  same. 
Or,  as  it  is  expressed  by  a  German  philosopher: 

All  that  ai)pear.s  to  our  eyes  as  diirerence  and  distinction, 
however  mucli  our  consciousiu'ss  insists  upon  nonidentity,  is 
nevertheless  in  essence  one  and  the  same  ;  it  is  but  the  ])resenta- 
tion,  the  formation,  the  diaracterization,  the  development,  alter- 
ation, expression,  revelation,  or  form  of  the  single  substance  whicli 
alone  exists. 

This  becomes  manifest  at  once  in  the  relation  which  is 
thought  to. exist  between  God  and  the  world.  For  centuries 
the  Church  of  Christ  has  guarded  its  barrier  against  every 
open  or  crypto-pantheism  by  the  solemn  confession  in  the 
inaugural  of  its  Articles  of  Faith:  "I  believe  in  God,  the 
Father  Almighty,  Maker  of  heaven  and  earth;"  and,  in  the 
third  century,  justly  denounced  the  first  M'cakening  of  the  cre- 
ation idea,  together  with  the  lirst  elTort  to  make  the  world  co- 
eternal  by  putting  Origen  under  her  ban.     The  most  distinctly 


PaniJie'ism' s  Destruction  of  Boundaries. 

marked  bouiidaiy  line  lies  between  God  and  tlie  world;  and 
with  the  taking  away  of  this  line  all  other  boundaries  are 
blurred  into  mere  shadows.  For  every  distinction  made  in' 
our  consciousness — aye,  the  very  faculty  itself  of  onr  conscious- 
ness to  make  distinctions — takes  I'oot  at  last  in  this  primordial 
antithesis.  Tiiink  it  away,  and  it  becomes  night,  in  whose 
shadowy  darkness  everything  in  our  horizon  dissolves  in  a  som- 
ber gray.  But  every  pantheist  starts  out  with  the  denial  of  this 
primordial  antithesis,  which  is  mother  to  every  antithesis  among 
creatures.  The  pantheist  stands  ready,  the  moment  we  open  our 
Bible,  to  invalidate  the  solemn  inaugural  of  Genesis.  No,  not 
"in  the  beginning,"  he  says,  for  there  was  no  beginning;  not 
"created,"  for  the  world  is  eternal ;  and  not  ''the  heaven  and  the  ' 
earth,"  for  the  beyond  is  a  mere  dream.  In  this  way  the  three 
most  deeply  marked  lines  of  our  distinction  are  wiped  out  with 
a  single  stroke,  and  every  boundary  is  taken  away  between  God 
and  the  world,  between  time  and  eternity,  between  the  here 
jand  the  hereafter.  And  yet,  i^antheism  must  needs  begin  with 
the  revocation  of  these  antitheses.  It  can  do  no  other.  As  far 
as  histoiy  extends  our  thinking  travels  along  a  smooth  path, 
but  stops  at  the  point  where  history  began,  as  well  as  at  the 
point  where  histoi*y  ends.  There  it  finds  before  and  behind 
it  a  bottomless  abyss,  over  which  it  dares  not  leap,  and  which 
is  much  less  to  be  spatmed  by  a  bridge;  and  hence  it  must, 
at  any  price,  cipher  away  both  that  end  and  that  beginning. 
For  the  pantheist  tlieie  is  no  existence  of  God  and  the  world 
thinkable  as  two  individual  substances. 

Objection  may  be  made  by  reminding  us  of  what  we  stated 
above,  namely,  that  it  is  another  wind  which  blows  in  the 
higher  circles  of  science  ;  that  in  those  better  circles  pantheism, 
together  with  nniterialism,  has  long  since  been  shown  the  door; 
and  while  the  no7i  liquet  is  freely  expressed  concerning  the 
origin,  basis,  and  end  of  things,  there  is  general  content  to  in- 
quire more  carefully  into  the  phenomena  of  tlie  natural  and  the 
spiritual  world,  and  to  live  on  poetry  for  the  heart.  And  this 
is  60.  But  has  the  principle  of  evolution,  or  the  DesGcndenz- 
theoricy  as  the  Germans  call  it,  therefore  ceased  to  be  the  Credo 
of  the  science  of  our  day?  And  what  is  this  evolution  theory 
other  than  the  aj^plication  of  the  pantheistic  process  to  the 
empiric  investigation  of  phenomena?     llei-e,  also,  the  ^^  natura 


1 


) 


Mei/iodisi  Bevieuo. 

sallus  no)i  facif'' — "nature  takes  no  leap." — is  motto.  Here, 
also,  everytliirif^  that  appears  is  explained  by  a  preceding  ap- 
pearance. And  here,  also,  both  with  spiritual  and  natural 
phenomena,  are  denied  all  real  differences  of  kind,  together 
with  independence  of  origin,  and  every  deeper  distinction  of 
being,  in  either  pphere  by  itself,  as  well  as  between  the  two 
spheres  mutually ;  and  hence,  as  a  mat'er  of  fact,  ever}' line 
which  marks  a  boundary  is  wiped  out,  and  every  boundary  post 
which  divides  tlio  jurisdiction  is  leveled  to  the  ground.  Yon 
Ilartman  did  not  exaggerate  when  he  said  that  "for  our  times 
the  Desccndenz-lheorie  is  unconditii)nally  correct,  and  is  stead- 
ily gaining  ground  amid  the  spiritual  tempest;"  or,  as  an 
English  writer  expressed  it,  "Science  amongst  us  is  at  it;5  high- 
est whon  it  intei])rets  all  orders  of  phenomena  as  dilTerently 
conditioned  modes  of  one  kind  of  uniformity."  Though  Dar- 
win himself  conceded  that  his  selection  theory  was  insufficient 
to  explain  the  moi-phological  differences  of  species,  the  evolu- 
tion tlieory  was  therefore  not  dismisicd.  That  which  was  ex- 
plained by  Darwin  mechanically  could  likewise  be  interpreted 
dynamically^  and  even  if  need  be  telculogically,  as  a  sponta- 
neous ])rocess  in  the  cosmos  whicli  received  its  impulse  from 
the  first  gorm,  whose  motive  starts  from  the  telcological  idea 
which  dominates  the  entire  process.  One  may  thci'efore  be  a 
Darwinist,  and  with  Darwin  bend  the  knee  reverently  before  a 
"  God,"  for  surely  God  created  this  "force"  which  potentially 
included  the  entire  cosmos  within  itself;  or  it  was  he  who 
determined  for  tl^j  cosmos  the  aim  of  ito  development  proccss. 
This  system  is  so  pliable  that  more  than  one  Ilerbartian,  in 
spite  of  his  own  jjrinciple,  is  found  to  side  witli  Darwinism. 

This  would  not  be  difficult  to  underotand  if  Darwin,  with  the 
help  of  the  fossil  discoveries,  had  succeeded  in  laying  before  us 
the  steps  of  transition  in  specimens  fro:n  the  plant  to  man, 
all  which  would  fit  into  each  other  as  links  of  a  chain.  Hut  this 
is  not  so.  And  it  is  not  merely  the  search  after  the  missing  link  ; 
but  even  if  wc  go  back  a  period  of  three  hundred  thousand 
years,  for  which  it  ii  claimed  there  is  ccrtiin  j)roof,  traces  of 
species  arc  found  in  the  fossil  world  which  are  now  extinct, 
and  also  deviating  forms.  But  the  skeletons  of  t'.ie  still  existing 
species  arc  strikingly  analogous  to  the  skeljtons  of  our  animals. 
In  simple  honesty,  therefore,  Darwin    acknowledges  that  the 


Pantheism's  Destruction  of  Boundaries. 

proof  is  far  from  coin|>leto,  tliat  it  is  still  incomplete  inTi^ 
domain  of  nature ;  and  let  us  add  that  for  spiritual  purposes  it 
tinds  no  supjiort  for  a  single  point.  J>ut  says  he  repeatedly, 
"This,  therefore,  shakes  not  my  faith  in  the  evolution  theory." 
It  follows,  therefore,  that  we  are  not  dealing  with  a  comj)ulsory 
theorem,  which  has  beeuconclusively  demonstrated,  but  with  an 
hypothesis  Avhicli  is  supported  by  a  most  defective  induction, 
whose  general  ap])lause  takes  root  not  in  inco'.itestable  facts,  and 
much  less  in  complete  proof,  but  in  a  general  mood  of  spirits  ; 
since  Darwin's  theory  ])laces  before  our  learned  and  civilized 
public  a  solution  of  the  world  problem  which  responds  to  its 
most  secret  sympathies.  And  if  it  is  known  that  the  keynote 
of  our  age  is  pantheistic,  and  that  in  the  evolution  theory  there 
appears  one  of  the  richest  thoughts  of  pantheism,  namely,  that 
of  the  ever-continuing  process,  in  its  most  attractive  form,  is 
tlien  the  assertion  too  bold,  that  in  the  Descendenz-theorie  is 
f :>und,  as  its  chief  motive,  the  impulsive  force  of  pantheism? 

Or,  to  probe  the  real  motive  deeper  still,  in  the  evolution 
tlieoiT,  even  as  in  pantheism,  hides  the  desire  of  the  -human 
heart  to  rid  itself  of  God.  In  spite  of  his  iiractische  Ytrnunft 
it  was  this  desire  which  actuated  Kant,  of  whom  Baader  cor- 
rectly wrote  :  "The  fiuidaniental  error  of  his  philosophy  is  that 
man  is  autonomous  and  spontaneous,  as  if  he  possessed  reason 
of  himself  ;  for  it  transforms  man  to  a  god,  and  so  becomes  pan- 
theistic." And  Feuerbach  uttered  merely  the  consequence  of 
this  system  whon  ho  said,  "God  was  my  iirst  thought,  reason 
ray  second,  and  man  my  third  and  last  thought.  The  subject 
of  the  Godhead  is  reason,  but  the  subject  of  the  reason  is 
man;"  and  by  these  words  he  likewise  expressed  the  deepest 
thought  of  our  age.  Buchner,  himself  an  avowed  atheist, 
frankly  declares  that,  even  more  than  that  of  Lamarck,  Dar- 
win's theory  is  purely  atheistic  ;  and  we  heartily  agree  with  this 
opinion.  For  what  advantage  is  it  that  we  trace  the  course  of 
the  law  of  causality  without  a  break  back  to  the  first  gaseous 
nebula  and  cell  or  germ,  when  behind  this  cell  or  germ  the  in- 
explicable act  of  a  creative  God  still  demands  our  recognition, 
and  with  all  our  thiid<ing  we  strike  upon  the  very  rock  to 
evade  which  the  whole  theory  M'as  invented  ?  If  it  be  true, 
therefore,  that  the  Moses  der  modernen  Freigeister,  as  Feuer- 
bach calls  Spinoza,  lias  not  led  us  into  the  promised  land  of 

35 — FIFTU  SEUIKS,   VOL.  IX. 


Methodist  Review. 

])liilosoi)Lic  rest,  and  tliat  tlie  failure  of  pantheistic  philos- 
ophy call  no  lonn^er  he  concealed,  it  is  still  in  the  evolution 
Jiheory  that  the  harmful  impulse  of  pantheism  works  in  the 
most  seductive  manner,  since  it  spends  all  its  power  to  maintain 
the  nonexistence  of  separating  houndaries  in  every  dej)artment 
of  our  knowledge.  Valentinus,  the  most  sensible  of  (inostics, 
relegated  evolution  hack  of  the  creation  to  the  [ivOoq  (the 
dfcji),  hut  was  so  much  aware  of  the  danger  for  the  erasure 
of  boundaries  which  concealed  itself  in  this  that  out  of  the 
AvTOTTaTup  he  makes  suddenly  a  God  to  appear  in  the  form  of 
the  Iloros,  or  Ilorkos,  that  is,  the  boundary  for  the  mainte- 
nance of  the  fixed  order  of  all  that  exists.  This  thought,  how- 
ever strange  its  form,  is  nevertheless  entirely  correct  as  a  poetic 
image.  Faith  in  the  living  God  stands  or  falls  with  the  main- 
tenance or  removal  of  boundaries.  God  created  the  boundaries. 
lie  himself  is  the  chief  boundary  for  all  his  creatures,  and  the 
effacement  of  boundaries  is  virtually  identical  with  the  oblitera- 
tion of  the  idea  of  God.  If,  then,  it  be  never  so  true  that  mod- 
ern philosophy  "began  with  doubt  and  ended  with  despair" 
this  whole  pantheistic  stream  has  left  a  j)oisonous  slime  upon 
the  shore,  and  it  is  in  Darwin's  evolution  theory  that  this  slime 
reveals  its  power. 

It  may  truly  be  said  that  with  all  differences  of  opinion  this 
evolution  theory  is  the  "formula  of  unity,"  which  at' present 
unites  all  priests  of  modern  science  in  their  secularized  temple. 
A  few  dreatners  may  utter  com])laints  against  this,  but  they  are 
aged  manikins,  who,  as  described  by  Ilartman,  "  feel  them- 
selves incapable  of  a  second  education,  but  whose  numbers  liave 
so  long  been  diminishing  that  they  are  powerless  to  stop  tho 
victor's  march  of  the  new  truth."  This  evolution  theory  has 
become  the  fashion-system,  not  merely  with  the  Darwins  and 
Ilacckels,  the  Spencers  and  the  jSTagelis,  but  equally  so  with 
our  theologians,  with  our  psychologists  and  moralists.  Even  an 
adherent  of  Lotze,  my  learned  colleague  Dr.  De  la  Saussaye, 
of  the  city  university,  wrote  only  recently:  "Xowhere  is  a 
definite  frontier  between  the  domains  of  nature  and  of  spirit 
clearly  demonstrable,  nor  may  an  unmixed  expression  be  predi- 
cated of  either  sphere." 

Ihit  we  are  most  concerned  about  the  favor  with  which  this 
critical  theory  gains  among  our  jurists  (tho  divinely  appointed 


Pantheisin's  Destrvctin  of  Boiuidai  ies. 

watcljers  of  tlie  boundary  of  the  "Mount"),  as  is  shown  by  the 
example  of  the  late  Ihering.  We  are  second  to  none  in  warm 
admiration  of  his  talents  ;  but  it  may  not  be  concealed  that  Iher- 
ingwasan  evolutionist.  Being  himself  no  natural  j)hih)Sopher, 
he  withholds  an  oi)inion  on  Darwinism,  but  definitely  declares 
"that  the  result  whicii  he  has  reached  in  his  studies  of  law- 
establishes  it  most  firmly  in  my  profession,"  The  "sense  of 
right  has  grown  with  him  to  be  eternal,  since  everything' which 
comes  into  being  is  devoted  to  destruction."  And  this  eternal 
process  is  continued  of  necessity'  by  evolution,  which  evolution 
begins  in  the  brute  creation  ;  for,  writes  lie,  "  By  the  same 
necessity  under  which,  according  to  Darwin's  theory,  one  spe- 
cies develops  itself  from  another  does  the  one  end  of  justice 
find  its  origin  in  another,"  and  then  adds,  in  an  altogether 
pantheistic  sense,  "Right  knows  as  h'ttle  of  a  break  as  nature; 
that  which  goes  before  must  first  exist,  before  that  whicli  is 
higlier,  of  course  by  evolution,  can  follow  after," 

He  docs  not  deny,  therefore,  the  existence  of  God,  In  his 
preface  lie  even  derives  the  "purpose"  which  explains  to  him 
cveiything  from  a  conscious  God.  But  Avith  him,  as  with  all 
evolutionary  theists,  this  is  none  other  to  him  than  an  x  for  thip, 
to  him,  unknown  greatness,  of  whose  authority  he  rids  himself 
in  every  concrete  case.  According  to  Ihering,  the  sense  of  right 
is  not  innate,  but  only  "begotten  in  us"  by  the  evolution  of 
right.  Christian  ethics,  whicli  still  holds  to  eternal  principles, 
lie  condemns  because  of  this  clinging  to  the  absolute ;  and  when 
rightly  he  ])rotcsts  against  the  separation  which  snatches  right 
from  its  moral  basis,  and  traces  for  himself  the  origin  of  moral 
life,  he  represents  tliis  moral  life  as  produced  by  the  "  jmrpose," 
which  is  again  the  process  of  endless  generation.  "Wlicn  the 
question  is  put,  "  Who  is  the  subject  of  this  purpose,  who  ordains 
it  and  renders  it  real  ?"  then  theism  is  again  abandoned,  and  he 
affirms  that  "  God  is  not  the  iiTial  purpose  of  morality  ;  the 
end  and  purpose  of  ethics  is  society,"  Whether  or  not  God  is 
still  spoken  of  in  the  Gnostic  sense  as  "a  final  end  of  morality," 
with  this  interpretation  the  Christian  ground  is  entirely  de- 
serted. The  fulfillment  of  man's  being  i?,  looked  for  in  "self 
becoming  one's  Own  end,"  and  whatever  has  the  insolence  to 
attack  him  in  the  holy  temple  of  that  ideal  is  treated  with  con- 
tempt.    Faith  is  put  in  Michael  Kohlhaas,  who,  in  Yon  Ivleist's 


Methodist  Review. 

iiovi.'I,  draws  the  sword  against  society.  And  when  we  are 
taught,  "Rather  suffer  wrong,"  and  Christ  exclaims  in  his  Ser- 
mon on  the  jSIoimt,  "If  any  man  take  away  thy  coat,  let  him 
have  thy  cloak  also,''  Ihcring  rejects  this  as  apathy,  which  be- 
trays how  blunt  and  weak  the  sense  of  right  has  grown  ;  and  he 
jirovokes  strife  among  the  citizens  by  exhorting  them  never  to 
suffer  anything  in  jirivate  life  to  go  unpunished.  Hence,  if 
his  theory  triumphs,  not  merely  our  Christian,  but  even  IIer« 
hart's  system,  which  in  a  more  Christian  way  makes  right  to 
be  born  from  the  {esthetic  thirst  after  peace,  must  pass  under 
the  juridical  ban.  For  then  it  will  not  bo,  "Blessed  are  the 
peace  makers,''  but  "Blessed  every  one  who  as  a  fighting-cock 
flies  in  a  passion  for  his  right."  And  when  an  heros  like  Ihering 
teaches  thus,  what  may  be  looked  for  at  the  hands  of  lesser  gods  ? 
To  show  to  what  extent  the  influence  of  this  pantheistic  tend- 
ency and  of  the  evolution  theory  which  has  become  its  Credo 
has  effaced,  one  by  one,  all  formei'ly  recognized  boundaries, 
must  we  thread  our  way  across  the  entire  domain  of  cosmic 
phenomena  and  the  still  broader  field  of  sciences?  This  is  not 
necessary.  Here  also  "  the  lion  may  be  known  by  its  claws." 
And  it  is  quite  sufficient  for  the  question  in  hand  that  the  chief 
boundary  lines  which  have  become  Ijlurred  be  noted,  and  that 
as  theologians  we  halt  a  little  longer  at  the  boundary  removal 
on  theoloiric  c;rounds.  Xow,  the  blurrin<i:  of  boundaries  begins 
of  necessity  in  our  senses  and  ideas.  Beal  boundaries,  such  as 
exist,  for  instance,  between  man  and  woman,  are  not  to  be 
wiped  out.  It  is  as  true  of  philosophy  as  of  the  English  Par- 
liament that  "it  can  do  ever^-thing  excej)t  making  a  man  a 
woman."  And  though  a  l)i-illiant  scholar,  whose  oratory  has 
more  tlum  once  delighted  ns,  once  stoutly  prophesied  that,  like 
the  diabolic  love  of  unnature,  so  also  the  divinely  innate  love 
between  man  and  woman  shall  extinguish  its  torch,  we  ven- 
ture to(l(!ny  that  among  our  own  contemporaries,  or  yet  among 
the  younger  generation,  we  have  ever  discovered  the  slightest 
decrease  of  this  natural  love.  No,  tl;c  boundaries  which,  inde- 
])endcnt  of  our  thought,  exist  in  real  life,  are  immoval)le.  Water 
is  never  reconcilable  with  fire.  IIcMice  an  erasure  of  boundaries 
can  be  spoken  of  only  in  our  representation,  in  our  senses  and 
ideas;  and  of  these  ideas  Thihj  complains  none  too  strongly 
that  "  Finally,  all  concepts  lose  themselves  in  each  other  amid 


Paidheism^s  Destruction  of  Bouncliiries. 

the  one  i;reat  tan<;lc  of  the  absolute  Ego."  This  was  not 
clone  all  at  once.  Tlie  very  majesty  of  logic,  with  its  unchange- 
able laws  of  thought,  stood  in  the  way  of  this  amalgamation; 
licnce,  violence  had  to  be  done  to  the  logical  l)oundaries  first, 
before  the  other  boundaries  could  successfully  be  blurred.  Thus 
the  unhappy  process  began,  llegcl  clearly  saw  that  his  iden- 
tity system  would  not  do  for  common  logic,  and  therefore  did 
not  shrink  from  attacking  logic  itself  by  cutting  the  sinews  of 
the  principium,  exclusi  tei'tii  inedii.  Thus  only  did  he  clear 
the  course  for  his  cavalcade  of  identical  ideas.  And  then  he  let 
them  file  before  his  thinking  spirit  two  by  two  and  arm  in  arm — 
the  something  with  the  nothing,  the  here  with  the  3'onder, 
the  finite  with  the  infinite,  the  ideal  with  the  real,  the  being 
with  the  thinking,  tlic  object  with  the  subject,  the  different 
with  the  nondifferent,  liberty  with  necessity,  the  imaginary 
light  with  the  imaginary  darkness. 

And  of  course  he  did  not  stop  short  with  abstractions.  His 
object  and  that  of  all  his  followers  was  the  application  to  life  of 
the  identity  idea.  Then  it  became  a  serious  matter.  For  the 
boundary  between  God  and  the  world  also  fell  awa}',  which 
boundary,  according  to  the  formula  of  old  Hellas,  may  possibly 
refer  to  a  distinction  in  thought,  but  never  to  a  distinction  in 
time  or  in  essence.  According  to  Dr.  Mayer's  formula,  God 
was  "  reduced  to  a  world-power,"  and,  worse  still,  his  conscious 
life  dissolved  in  our  human  life.  In  this  wise  the  boundary 
between  God  and  man  was  taken  away,  with  the  preponderance 
on  the  human  side.  The  boundary  bctw'een  man  and  man 
must  needs  follow.  We  rise  as  ocean  waves  and  disappear 
among  its  waters.  AVe  bud  as  leaves  on  the  tree,  that  in  with- 
ering wo  may  give  place  to  the  new  leaf  in  spring,  which 
interprets  Homer's  line,  "The  wind  poui-s  the  leaves  to  the 
ground,"  essentially,  and  not  chronologically. 

The  spiritual  boundaries  came  next.  Between  our  physical 
and  psychical  life  also  every  boundary  had  to  fall  away.  Truth 
was  given  in  marriage  to  error.  Hirner  even  boasted  of  the 
''  Heroism  of  the  Lie."  Good  and  evil,  also,  and  sin  and  holi- 
ness, were  to  reconcile  their  hatred.  What  is  good  ?  "  Each  one 
is  only  what  he  can  be."  Nei-o  and  Jesus  are  merely  dilfercnt 
manifestations  of  one  and"  the  same  divine  impulsive  power. 
The  ancient  Parsces  were  no  fools  when,  next  to  Ormuzd,  they 


Metliodlst  Review. 

rL'M.icretl  divine  homage  to  Ahriiiian  and  liis  Devs,  because, 
t'orstiotli,  what  we  cull  Satan  is  but  another  nan)e  for  tlie  Hoi)' 
One  uf  Israel.  And,  when  we  lind  in  society  much  that  is  no- 
ble and  mucli  that  we  dislike,  the  old  lif^ure  of  liolune  declares 
that  in  our  own  organism  likewise  there  is  much  that  is  noble 
in  the  brain  nnd  Uiuch  in  the  entrails  to  rouse  our  dislike,  but 
that  without  the  entrails  these  brains  could  not  exist. 

In  this  wise  the  blurring  of  boundaries  is  restlessly  continued, 
not  merely  in  the  identification  of  force  and  matter,  but  practi- 
cally by  identifying  power  and  right;  by  dissolving  responsi- 
bility into  a  pitiable  atavism;  by  confusing  property  and  theft,, 
by  weakening  the  antithesis  between  the  authorities  and  the 
subject,  making  both  divisors  of  the  one  idea  of  State.  In  this 
State,  which  jjrovides  for  every  want,  as  Hothe  wills  it,  the 
Church  of  Christ  also  must  disappear.  The  love  for  native 
land  must  give  way  to  cosmopolitan  pi-eference.  Ko  difference 
is  countenanced  between  city  and  village — only  communities 
are  known  ;  and  no  difference  is  longer  tolerated  among  classes 
of  societv,  in  modes  of  living  or  national  dress.  Uniformity 
is  the  curse  which  our  modern  life  willfully  feeds  upon.  In 
music  Beetliovcn  was  the  first  to  grasp  this  pantheistic  tendency 
of  our  age,  and  to  voice  it  for  thousands  u[)on  thousands  of 
hearts  by  his  C  minor  and  Ninth  Symphonies;  and  after  him 
"Wagner  has  willfully  broken  down  the  boundary  between  the 
worlds  of  sound  and  of  thought.  Certain  stylists  incline  more 
and  more  to  confuse  the  inkpot  with  the  jiallet.  Yes,  there 
has  been  formed  i^  circle  which  would  be  glad  to  have  the 
boundary  removed  between  language  and  language,  and  which 
would  think  the  world  idealized  if  it  were  peopled  with  four- 
teen hundred  millions,  who,  iroxn  the  North  to  the  South  Pule, 
ppake  none  other  than  one  holy  Yolapuk. 

But  enough.  We  made  no  mention  of  the  theory  which 
makes  man  descend  from  the  chimpanzee,  simply  because  this 
theme — pardon  the  term — is  too  thi-eatlbare.  Only  it  is  worthy 
of  note  that  the  X.  II.  Courant  recently  announced  that  in  our 
zoological  garden  the  orang-outang  was  not  dead  but  deceased  i 
also  that  the  vocabulary  of  the  monkey  language  now  numbers 
four  words,  clearly  understood  by  means  of  a  j>honograph,  which 
disarms  Max  Miiller,  who  still  thinks  language  the  bouiulary 
line  drawn  between  i:ian  and  r.uimal.     But  wc  need  say  no 


Pantheism'' s  Destruction  of  Boundaries. 

more  on  this.  For  all  this  theory  really  asserts  is  that  every- 
thing^ is  allied,  and  whether  a  stone  drops,  or  rain  clatters,  or 
the  hirk  lia[)s  his.wiiiirs  ami  sii)ij:;s  his  iiioniiui;  son<y,  or  man 
thinks,  composes  poetry,  and  kneels  in  prayei',  it  is  all  one  life- 
ntterance,  altogether  an  excitement  of  feeling  and  a  spontSr 
neous  life-utterance  of  the  unknown  absolute  Spirit. 

But  the  religious  interests  briefly  claim  onr  attention,  for  with 
these  entered  the  strongest  motive  for  boundary  removals.  Onr 
Christian  religion  drew  a  new  and  very  deep  boundary  line 
between  the  profane  and  the  sacred,  which  was  rejected  by  the 
secularizing  spirit  almost  with  insults  and  sneers.  There  was 
no  longer  room  for  theology  as  a  science ;  her  metaphysic  was 
identical  with  philosophy,  and,  for  the  rest,  was  lost  in  literary, 
historical,  and  ethnological  studies.  The  boundary  between 
God  and  idols  fell  of  itself  away,  since  animism  and  fetich- 
ism  were  classed  with  our  Christian  religion  under  one  head. 
In  this  organic  connection  the  origin,  essence,  and  idea  of 
religion  could  be  known  from  religious  phenomena,  and  in 
tliis  way  arose  the  newborn  "science  of  religion,"  M^hich  more 
and  more  supplants  tlieology.  The  knowledge  of  the  object 
of  religion  is  no  more  cared  for,  but  merely  the  knowledge 
of  the  sensations,  representations,  and  utterances  to  which 
religious  feeling  moves  the  subject.  With  this  every  leading 
difference  in  religion  fell  away,  and  every  boundary  between 
heresy  and  doctrine ;  and  that  which  moved  the  spirits  in  the 
world  estranged  from  Christ,  was  bound,  as  some  affirm,  to 
work  its  effect  in  the  Church  also  with  utmost  pliancy.  And 
then — O,  why  not  otherwise? — the  "  Yermittelungs-theologen," 
so  attractive  in  other  ways,  have  in  Schleiermacher's  track 
sought  salvation  in  their  ethical,  theosophical,  and  apocalyptic 
diversiflcation  —  in  that  unhap[>y  YerviitteJung  by  which  in 
advance  the  opponent  gained  the  da3\  We  do  not  say  this 
because  we  do  not  appreciate  their  labors,  so  brilliant  in  many 
respects,  or  because  Ave  do  not  understand  the  goodness  of 
their  intention,  and  much  less  from  a  desire  to  offend  any  of 
them  personally,  but  because  their  ]">osition  was  simply  un- 
tenable. They  were^?oi5  de  tcrre^  and  proposed  a  walk  with 
fot  defer  ^  and  they  did  not  Avin  the  spirit  of  the  times  for 
Christ,  but  the  spirit  of  the  limes  estranged  them  more  and 
more  from  confessing  Christianity. 


Methodist  Review, 

Selileiennaclier  was  pantheist  ami  subjectivist.  lie  l)roui,^lit 
religious  ])aiitlieisiii  with  liiia  from  the  circles  of  the  ^foia- 
vians  and  found  philosophic  pantheism  in  Gernianv's  univer- 
sities of  his  day.  This  was  at  once  manifested  in  liis  propo- 
sition that  God  is  not  thinkahle  without  the  world,  which 
proposition  was  defended  among  us,  as  Professor  Bavinck 
correctly  showed,  by  the  late  Professor  De  la  Saussayc,  of 
Groningen  ;  and  every  invention  by  the  Martensens,  the 
Kothcs,  the  Keerls,  and  the  llolfmans,  in  Germany,  to  remove 
the  ancient  landmarks  from  the  domain  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion, has  been  echoed  from  our  pulpits  ever  since  and 
reprinted  by  our  press.  By  the  conversion  of  truth  into  ethics 
the  boundary  fell  which  separates  moral  life  from  the  life  of 
thought,  and  presently  dogmatics  had  to  surrender  its  birth- 
right to  the  ''description  of  nioral  life."  A  "Union  Church" 
without  confessional  discipline  became  the  ideal  also  among  us. 
To  be  e(|ually  stern  with  tlie  Calvinist  and  sympathetic  with 
the  rationalist  became  indicative  of  a  higher  life;  and  by 
degrees  there  stole  in  all  manner  of  strange  doctrine.  Christ 
would  have  come  in  the  world  even  had  sin  never  entered,  for 
Christ  was  the  natural  ideal  toward  which  the  progress  of  the 
human  race  was  dii'ected.  In  Christ  the  Son  of  God  was  not 
incarnate,  but  human  nature  had  reached  in  him  a  higher, 
divine-human  character.  As  a  human  being  Jesus  could  not 
liave  been  mere  man,  and  in  this  way  was  renewed  the  legend 
of  the  Androgyne.  Soul  and  body  were  no  longer  two,  but 
lost  in  the  mingliui;  of  the  Gehtleihllclie.  The  mystery  of  the 
Trinity  \vas  a})plauded,  but  recast  as  by  charm  in  the  sense  of 
the  newer  pliilosophy.  The  atonement  consisted  not  in  the 
dying  of  the  Lamb  of  God  for  our  sin,  but  in  the  appearance 
upon  the  tree  of  our  race  of  its  ideal  Ijrauch.  The  Holy 
Scriptures  are  no  longer  the  protluct  of  a  positive  rt'vehition, 
but  the  fi'uit  of  Israel's  organic  development,  under  higher 
influences,  in  connection,  therefore,  witli  whatever  was  im- 
parted to  other  nations.  Justification  by  faith  became  lost 
nearly  altogether  in  the  nursing  process  of  a  heaveidy  holiness. 
Even  the  absolute  boundary  between  this  and  the  conn'ng  life 
Mas  taken  away.  Conversion  may  occur  after  death  ;  and  there 
have  I)ecn  theologians  among  these  who  jireached  the  contimi- 
ance,  on  the  other  side  of  the  grave,  of  a  sacramental  Church, 


Panthelsm''s  Destruction  of  Boundaries. 

destined  }X)iKlcr  to  complete  the  ]ioliue.=s  process  which  here 
renmiiis  unKnished. 

That  which  stares  ns  in  tlie  face  in  all  these  parts  is  the  effect 
of  what  SchleiernKicher  spun,  and  of  what  Schelliiig,  more 
dangerous!}',  emi)r(»i(lered  with  the  glittering  thread  of  gold. 
It  is  the  recasting  of  forms,  the  wii>ing  uut  of  lines,  and  iitting 
out  the  Christian  essence  in  a  modern  philosophic  garh.  And 
by  doing  this  truth  was  lost,  not  merely  that  objective  truth 
which  stands  gi-avcn  in  the  tables  of  our  confession,  but  that  in- 
ward truth  by  which  this  confession  meets  with  the  rcsi)onse  of 
*' Anum"  from  our  heart.  It  all  became  a  confusion  of  tongues, 
one  cluKJS  of  floating  nnsts.  And  then  Schelling  completed  in 
these  men  what  Kant  had  begun  with  his  '''' statutarische  Reli- 
gion^'' bj'  inspiri!:g  them,  as  Seholtin  expressed  it,  with  the  art 
of  proclaiming ''new  and  strange  ideas  in  ecclesiastical  terms 
as  the  decisions  of  ancient  orthodoxy."  And  let  us  grant  that 
they  jumped  after  the  drowning  man  in  the  philosophic  stream 
to  save  h.irn ;  but  the  tragic  fate  overtook  them  of  being  dragged 
down  to  the  deep  by  him  whom  they  tried  to  save. 

"We  do  not  idealize  Ritschl,  but  after  all  the  chaotic  would- 
be  theology  there  is  relief  in  the  clearness  of  his  thought.  Of 
him  it  is  known,  at  least,  that  he  has  broken  with  the  old  meta- 
physics. But  with  Hitschl  we  wander  still  further  off.  Xo 
single  boundary  in  religion  is  left  unweakened  or  nnwarped  to 
mark  the  ancient  track.  Piety  is  still  demanded,  but  it  must 
be  altogether  gratuitous,  S[)ontaneous,  such  as  in  the  eiul  is  also 
thought  to  1)0  found  in  atiimals.  Some  scholars  claim  to  have 
discovered  in  our  house-dogs  real  ti-aces  of  religion,  as  first  be- 
gimiings  of  "piety,"  which  idea  is  so  grotesque  that  involunta- 
rily it  raises  the  question  whether  it  is  likewise  agi'eed  to  class 
them  w'ith  polytheists  or  moiiotlieists.  Fur  an  answer  to  which 
(since,  with  Islam  cxcei)ted,  nionog  imy  prefei's  to  be  classed 
with  mf>notheism)  some  clown  may  point  us  to  the  analog_y  of 
their  lower  love;  for  the  evolution  from  p(^lygamy  to  monog- 
amy has  not  been  attained  by  oni-  poodles  and  our  dogs. 


i 


Methodist  Jieoiew. 


Aki.  VII.— PANTlitrSM'S  DESTRUCTION   OF   IJOUND- 
APJES.  — PART  II. 

As  far  as  the  scopo-  of  this  article  allows  ns  we  tliink  wc  have 
shown  coiK'lusively  that  tlic  ]>aiitht'istic  tendency  of  our  a^c 
and  the  evohitiun  doctrine,  which  is  its  legitimate  (laughter, 
have  in  large  measure  effaced  the  boundaries  and  are  bent 
upon  their  entire  destruction.  Facing  now  the  question,  What 
dangers  threaten  us  by  this  dcsti'uctiun  of  boundaries?  we  con- 
sider first  the  k^son  which  history  teaches.  For  under  like 
inHuences  a  state  of  society  has  been  developed  upon  a  broad 
scale  for  centuries  together  on  the  banks  of  the  Ganges,  and  it- 
part,  also,  in  the  Celestial  Kingdom  ;  and  afterward  both  gnosti 
cism  and  mysticism  have  inspired  smaller  circles  with  the  same 
spirit.  This  is  to  us  a  beacon  at  sea,  for  a  wreck  is  a  fair  image 
of  what  these  states  and  circles  show.  In  India's  beautiful 
domain  lives  one  of  the  most  richly  endowed  races,  ])rofound  \\\ 
spii'it,  mighty  in  numbers,  in  the  midst  of  tropical  weahh — a 
people  which  in  everything  competes  with  our  Western  nations 
and  may  even  exceed  us.  And  yet  that  peo])le  is  asleep,  has  long 
ceased  to  make  history;  and,  almost  without  effort,  Ihlam  first, 
then  the  Mongols,  and  lastly  England  have  conquered  this  royal 
people.  However  energetically  a  Keshub  Chunder  Sen  lately 
organized  his  propaganda  in  a  most  mastei-ly  way  to  arouse  his 
people  from  their  deathly  slumbers,  he  utterly  faileil.  And  the 
human  ideal  of  {haYogi  ITindoo  still  consists  of  a  benighted  her- 
mit immovably  staring  into  the  sun,  his  loins  girded  with  a 
serpent's  skin,  his  naked  breast  covered  by  coarse  hair,  wild 
ghrubs  growing  up  about  him,  and  a  songless  bird  building  its 
somber  nest  uj>on  his  holy  shoulders. 

And  what  has  become  of  Lao-Tse's  beautiful  fancies  in  China  ? 
Mr,  Balfour,  who  learned  to  know  Taoism  by  ])ersonal  obst'rva- 
tion,  conqilains  in  his  South  Place  Institute  lecture  that  Taoism 
has  lapsed  into  "a  low  and  des|)icable  superstition,  into  a  reli- 
gion in  its  worst  and  lowest  sense,  a  hocus-|)ocus  and  an  inqjo- 
sition."  And  vhen  in  the  pi'ovince  of  Kiang-si  he  calUnl  on 
the  Chang-]'"cn  S/nTi,  or  high  priest  of  this  sect,  his  holiness 
showed  him  in  his  beautiful  i>;dace  to  a  room  filled  with  eartlien 
jars,  carefully  corked  and  sealed,  in  which  by  his  magic  powei 


Pantheism'' 8  Destruction  of  Bonn 

he  had  confined  hundreds  (tf  evil  spii'its.  The  self-deiri:>dation 
and  cruel  iinniorahty  of  the  Vulentinians  and  Ophites  among 
the  Gnostics  needs  no  new  demonstration.  The  moral  destruc- 
tion which  this  self-same  m^ystical  pantheism  wrought  among 
the  Beghards  and  their  consorts,  and  in  our  country  among  the 
Antinomlans,  is  well  known  from  liistorj.  It  all  ended  in  the 
"rehabilitation"  of  the  flesh,  as  Iluudeshagen  calls  it.  The 
connnon  system  is,  ^'' quod  Deus  formaliter  ent^  omne  id  quod 
estP  Tlius  the  boundary  between  good  aiid  evil  falls  away. 
"The  will  of  God  determines  our  disposition,  and  should  a 
man  commit  even  a  thousand  deadly  sins  by  tlie  force  of  such 
predispositioTi  he  need  not  even  wish  that  lie  liad  not  committed 
them."  The  lesson  of  history  is  sufficient!}'  alarming.  Feuer- 
bach  once  wrote:  "The  eternal,  supersensual  death  is  God;" 
and,  indeed,  everything  seems  here  to  pass  away  in  national 
and  moral  death.  Of  course  this  needs  delineation,  in  l)road 
outline,  at  least,  wliich  we  will  do  in  the  order  of  our  personal, 
ecclesiastical,  and  political  life. 

A  thoughtful  student  who  had  suffered  himself  to  drift  with  the 
tempting  current  of  this  stream  prefaces  his  translation  of  one  of 
llcrhart's  works  with  these  significant  words  :  "  I  allowed  myself 
to  drift  with  it  because  it  promised  my  soul  peace  and  rest. 
And  what  has  it  brought  me  ?  A  feeling  of  powerlessness  and  of 
heaviness.  Then  I  turned  to  Herbartand  regained  that  buoy- 
ancy of  spirit  which  was  fast  failing  me."  We  understand  this 
well ;  for  wlien  the  boundary  between  God  and  the  world  falls 
away,  and  in  the  Holy  Trinity  we  can  no  longer  worship,  the 
fullness  of  the  richest  personal  life,  the  mainspring  of  our  own 
personal  existence,  is  broken.  He  who  deals  with  God  as  his 
holy  Friend  deepens  the  traits  of  his  own  nature;  and  llerbart 
expresses  it  beautifully:  "Ko  longer  to  feel  the  need  of  this 
Friend  were  devotion  to  such  loneliness  as  only  egoism  creates 
in  the  midst  of  society,  making  the  dwelling  of  man  a  wilder- 
ness." No  strong  character  can  be  formed  when  the  etcher,  who 
should  deeply  tnai'k  the  lines  in  the  metal,  lias  his  graver  taken 
from  him  by  the  dreamer,  who  dissolves  every  line.  Char- 
acter demands  strength  of  conviction  coupled  with  firmness 
of  will,  a  deep  sense  of  a  calling  in  life,  bound  up  with  faith 
of  success  in  this  calling;  and  these  factors  of  our  pci'sonality 
refuse  to  do  service  when  the  stability  of  lines  in  our  con- 


^Tcthodlst  Review.  I 

ceptioii  uf  life  vanishes  away  and  wlit-n  tlierc  is  no  more  laitii 
in  any  known  tnirli,  nor  in  law,  which  governs  the  will,  nor  in 
God,  who  calls  ns  to  ii  lit'ework  and  who  makes  everytliinii;  sub- 
serve its  aceoinpiishnient.  Underneath  your  feet  the  iountains 
rise  higher,  and  from  above  the  rain  ])our8  down  to  soak  tlie 
roadbed,  which  was  once  well  i^raveled  and  iirm,  and  turn  it 
into  mud,  where  walkini^  becomes  stumblin;^  and  slidimr- 
Hence  the  cionplaint,  which  was  never  more  general  than  in  our 
days,  about  the  dearth  of  character,  (jf  impressive  personality, 
and  oi:"  men  oi  ii'on  will.  In  sooth,  we  need  be  no  "admirers  of 
the  pa<t"  to  stand  aggrieved  at  the  dullness  of  the  faces  about 
ns,  at  their  weakness  of  expression  and  want  of  maidy  power,  in 
comparison  with  those  porti'aye<l  on  Uembi-andt's  canvases. 

jN'(.,  we  do  not  look  down  with  self-conceit  upon  agnosticism  ; 
and  when  we  hear  Tyndall  reverently  say,  "Standing  before 
t!ii«i  power  which  from  the  universe  forces  itself  upon  me,  1 
dare  not  do  other  than  speak  poetically  (»f  a  II im,  a  Spii-it,  or 
even  a  (.'ause ;  irs  mystery  overshadows  me,  but  it  remains  a 
mystery,"  then  this  agnostic  reverence  touches  us  more  deei)ly 
than  the  Kantian  refrain  of  God,  virtue,  and  innnortality. 
Ihit  forget  not  that  the  clearness  of  our  human  consciousness 
is  here  at  stake  ;  the  clearness  of  our  thiid-cing  becomes  dimmed. 
In  England  science  is  delined  as  the  statistics  of  what  is  meas- 
ured, weighed,  and  mimbci'ed.  '•'•  Bene  docet  qui  distinqxr^V 
("  He  teaches  well  who  (Jistinguislies  well'')  is  the  rnl&  of  dis- 
cipline from  which  our  thinking,  if  it  is  to  be  sound,  may  not 
escape;  i)ut  here  the  rule  is  made  to  reaii,  " /?r;?/'  docct  qui 
omnia  bene permiscet''''  ("He  teachco  well  who  mixes  all  things 
well").  And,  as  mentioned  above,  Hegel  had  to  invent  a  new 
logic  for  this  amalgamating  process  of  thought.  Before  this 
cloudy  manner  of  thinking  the  strength  of  conviction  recedes. 
Everything  clothes  itself  with  the  garb  of  modesty,  which  in  re- 
ality is  naught  but  hesitation  and  uncertainty,  until  in  the  end 
the  thirst  for  knowledge  turns  its  "love  glance"  upon  the  not- 
knowing,  and  Du  Bois  Reymond  proclaims  his  "?y7ioraZ»/m ?«.?," 
which  is  followed  by  the  agnostic  axiom  of  Spencer.  In  this 
way  it  is  not  merely  philosoi)hy  that  languishes  and  the  horizon 
of  science  itself  which  becomes  narrow,  but  in  practical  life 
skepticism  takes  jwssession  again  of  the  human  heart  and  draws 
the  clouds  ever  thicker  across  the  clearness  of  our  vision,  until 


Pantheism's  Dcf<tnictwn  of  Boundaries. 

in  tlie  end  tli:it  spark  of  holy  ontliusiasin  is  extinrrnislied  wliicli 
can  glow  only  in  higher  latitudes  beneath  the  azure  sky. 

Sport  is  excullenr,  and  we   felt  flattered   when  recently  our 
batters  and  bowlers  returned  from  Eiii^land  laden  with  honors; 
but  it  would  cause  us  greater  joy  if  we  discovered  among  our 
youth  enthusiasm  for  the  lK)nor  of  our  history,  for  patriotism, 
and  for  a  holy  conviction  in  things  lovely,  pure,  and  beautiful. 
But  alas!  here,  too,  the  erasure  of  boundaries  stands  otfensiv^ely 
in  our  way,  especially  in  the  sjiheres  of   morality.     The  word 
''sin"  became  too  pungent;  "holy  "was  replaced  by  "lu-ave." 
"  brave  "  by  "  decent,"  and  "  decent  "  by  "  neat,"  a  word  descrip- 
tive of  dress,  not  of  personality.     And  how  can  it  be  otherwise, 
when  the  noblest  thinkers  of  our  age  have  reduced  good  and 
evil  to  a  dilferem-o  of  degree  ;  when  the  law  for  moral  life  is  al- 
lowed to  be  fixed  autonomously  by  the  subject  himself,  by  Mdiich 
every  moral  idea  is  robbed  of  its  absohite  character;  when  the 
aesthetic  is  exalted  at  the  cost  of  the  ethic,  and  the  doctrine  is^ 
proclaimed  from  our  housetoj)s  that  the  sensual  life  also  must 
demand  satisfaction  for  its  claims?     Is  the  boundary  between 
truth  and  falsehood  still  fixed  ?     Is  it  still  known  what  honor 
is?     What  is  right  if  it  be  not  the  right  of  the  stronger? 
Who    distinguishes    between    theft   and    property?      Where, 
above  all,  is  the  boundary  which  distinguishes  guilt  from  fate, 
i'.nputability  from    irresistible    inclination?     Has   not   Buckle 
statistically  shown  how   each  year   there  must  take  place  so 
many  divorce  suits,  so  many  accidents,  so  many  murders  with 
the  dagger,  so  many  others  with  the  pistol,  and  so  many,  again, 
l)v  strancjulation  ?     It  is  all  the  one  process,  which,  restlessly 
turning  the  wheel  of  life,  hurries  it  on  from  that  which  is  real 
to  the  ideal.     Why,  then,  be  surprised  tliat  excise  duties  of  a 
less  honorable  sort  ai-e  ever  enlarged  ;  that  the  dissolute  woman 
presses  her  claims  with  ever-increasing  shamelessness;  and  that 
our  sturdy  Dutch  integrity,  which  was  once  proverbial  in  the 
market  of  the  world,  buries  itself  in  its  legends  ? 

Israel  once  sang,  "  I  love  the  Lord,  because  he  hath  heard 
my  voice  and  my  supplications."  Our  age  raves  with  altru- 
ism, because  its  heart  is  too  faint  for  real  egoism.  And  when 
the  noiunena  withdraw  themselves  in  the  far  distance  and, 
at  a  still  greater  distance,  disappear  behind  the  ever-changing 
phenomena,  and  a  jjontifex  is  no  longer  near  to  bridge  this 


Mdliodist  Review. 

uistunce,  nor  a  Ciirtius  to  fill  this  abyss  with  hiinself,  then 
a  poetry  is  still  spoken  of  which  with  its  thousand  forms  will 
blood  upon  this  iutinite  void.  But  they  forget  that  all  poetry, 
to  find  its  symbols,  must  start  from  the  antithesis  which  exists 
between  the  spiritual  and  the  natural.  And  therefore  look  at 
those  who  now  occupy  the  seats  upon  Parnassus,  where  Von- 
del  once  shone,  and  Bilderdijlc  won  his  laurels,  and  M'here  Da 
Costa  lost  himself  in  worship.  Against  this  mystic  ])oetry 
llerbart  wrote:  "The  concept  of  God  as  the  Father  of  men 
should  be  retained  in  its  strength.  A  purely  theoretical  cou- 
ce])t  is  worthless  ;  an  idea  is  bare  of  comfort."  However,  we 
do  not  satirize  our  age  ;  God  has  infinitely  enriched  it,  and 
in  many  respects  it  far  exceeds  the  age  that  went  before  it. 
There  are  many  worthy  people  now,  many  lovable  people,  who 
do  not  wear  the  purple,  but  who  constantly  remind  us  of  it ;  but 
we  miss  the  ])owerful  figures,  the  great  men,  the  stars  of  first 
magnitude.  How  have  the  stars,  like  those  in  Leyden,  been 
extinguished  one  after  another!  Who  is  Caprivi  compared 
with  Yon  Bismarck?  "When  Gladstone  dies  who  will  succeed 
him  ?  Alas  !  the  dynamic  weakening  can  no  longer  be  denied. 
Ejngonoi  have  taken  the  places  of  heroes,  and  at  their  feet 
crowd  the  multitudes  weary  of  life,  whose  satiety  betrays  itself 
in  the  dullness  of  their  eyes.  See  how  listlessness  stares  us  in 
the  face;  how  suicide  attracts;  how  the  number  of  our  insane  is 
ever  on  the  increase.  And  when  we  think  how  this  century 
began  with  placing  man  on  a  pedestal,  higher  than  ever  before, 
and  how  in  closing -it  leaves  him  behind  so  weary  of  life,  then 
does  not  this  century  seem  like  the  soap  bubble  which  glittered 
in  the  light  as  the  boy  blew  it  out  on  the  air,  but  which,  as  he 
blew  too  hard,  condensed  into  one  unsightly  droj)? 

Euroj)e  has  twice  known  such  })eriods  of  spiritual  atrophy, 
once  under  Koman  rule,  and  again  at  the  close  of  the  Middle 
Ages  ;  and  both  times  the  Church  of  Christ  caught  the  paralytic 
by  the  hand  and  lifted  him  up  so  that  ]»e  walked  and  life 
once  more  coursed  freely  through  his  veins.  Hence  the  ques- 
tion arises.  Will  the  Church  of  Christ  be  able  to  do  this  again? 
And  is  there  no  cause  for  fncreasing  anxiety  when,  by  this 
blurring  and  eventual  destruction  of  boundaries,  we  see  the 
Church  of  Christ  inwardly  ebbing  away  lier  life  and  outwanlly 
ivduced  to  an  ever-narrower  ecclcsiasticism  ?     If  there  is  one 


PantheisvCs  Destruction  of  'Jouadai'les. 

who  protests  against  the  idea  of  evolution  it  is  lie  wlio  came 
clown  from  the  Father  of  lights  in  order  to  reveal  himself  as 
God  in  the  flesh.  Christ  is  the  miracle.  It  is  Bethlehem  that 
opens  a  branch  in  the  line  of  lunnan  genealogy.  "Imnianuel's 
resurrection"  breaks  through  the  order  of  nature.  And  when 
the  Church  of  Christ  starts  out  upon  her  mission  in  the  woi'ld 
lier  deeply  marked  characteristic  is  not  to  be  of  the  world. 
Hence  the  Church  of  Christ  stands  ipso  facto  opposed  to  the 
unity  dream  of  the  paTitheistic  process,  and  denies  that  salva- 
tion can  ever  come  by  evolution  to  a  world  lost  in  sin.  This 
is  her  character  and  her  nature.  Abandonment  of  this  antith- 
esis is  the  sacrifice  of  her  character.  She  must  hold  up  this 
dualism  in  the  face  of  the  unregenerated  world.  And  as  soon 
as  the  boundary  is  blurred  which  sepai'atcs  her  from  the  natural 
life  she  ceases  to  be  the  Church  of  Christ.  This,  of  course,  is 
the  very  thing  ojiposed  by  the  pantheistic  tendency  of  our  age, 
and  no  less  sharply  by  the  principle  of  evolution.  Pantheism 
cannot  triumph  unless  the  6tuml)ling  block  of  the  cross  be 
taken  out  of  the  way  ;  the  evolution  theory  cannot  exist  if 
that  notion  of  Golgotha  be  not  removed,  flence  the  a^^sertion 
by  a  German  philosopher,  that  "where  culture  breaks  through 
there  can  be  no  more  Church."  Hence  Hegel's  statement  that 
the  State,  as  "  the  divine  will  in  the  present,"  must  make  the 
Church  subservient  to  its  end,  uniil  finally  she  be  dissolved 
in  the  State.  Hence  Rothe,  m'Iio  was  himself  a  theologian, 
threw  away  his  honor  and  committed  treason  to  the  Church, 
by  prophesying  her  rapid  declension  and  disapjiearanee  in  the 
State;  and  from  this,  no  less,  comes  the  cool  determination 
of  the  leading  jurists  in  Germany  to  forge  the  shackles  by 
which  to  chain  the  Church.  By  a  circle  of  almost  thirty 
professors  of  law,  among  whom  Ihering  was  one,  the  ductrine 
has  been  published  that  the  Protestant  Church  "is  a  ])urely 
worldly  organization,"  and,  stronger  still,  "  that,  rightly  con- 
sidered in  the  sense  of  modern  ecclesiastical  law,  the  Church  is 
onh''  a  part  of  the  world."  Tliis  shows  whither  this  erasure  of 
boundaries  lends  us;  and  we  are  no  longer  surjirised  at  the 
boldness  of  Pi-ofessor  Lorn  in  writing  that  the  Church  of 
Christ  is  nothing  more  than  a  Relnjions-Yereln^  and  that  the 
present  relation  between  State  and  Church  "rests  on  the  prin- 
ciple of  the  sovereignty  of  the  State,  to  which  even  the  Church 


Methodlist  Review. 

is  buhjected."  Tin's  would  not  signify  anytliing  if  tlic  watchers 
at  the  bcjiuidai'ies  wore  fouiul  at  their  post,  or,  at  least,  in  the  Ciunp 
of  the  Church.  But  it  is  well  known  that  the  opposite  is  true. 
They  who  rise  up  for  its  defense  are  put  outside  the  boundary 
line.  Every  boundary  of  confession  is  wiped  out  l)y  the  pu')- 
i;e  proclamation  of  liberty  of  doctrine.  The  Cliurch  must  be 
as  like  a  worldly  society  as  one  drop  of  water  is  like  anotlier. 
Even  thoui^h  Christ  be  denied  by  all  the  ])eople  it  must  still 
be  named  the  peo])le's  Ciiurch.  He  wlio  believes  in  no  Father 
in  heaven  may  proclaim  unto  the  people  his  philosophy  as 
(iospol.  And,  when  hope  is  fostered  that  "believing"  theolo- 
ijians  will  rebel  against  such  repulsive  contradictions,  tlie  Ver- 
tnittel unf/s-thcologen  of  every  predilection  may  be  seen  wilh 
fully  wij)iiig  out  the  confessional  boundary  and  adding  ever 
more  freely  their  philosophic  wine  to  the  pure  juice  of  life, 
as  if  bent  upon  the  entire  destruction  of  that  deeply  nuirked 
boundary  line  of  our  Christian  mysteries  which  separates  God's 
holy  revelation  from  our  darkened  reason. 

No  resistance,  therefore,  can  be  looked  for  from  this  quarter 
against  what  Hermann  calls  "the  spiritual  disturbance"  of  our 
age.  As  long  as  a  spiritual  tohu  va  hohu  remains  the  lauded 
ideal  among  these  leaders  no  invincible  principles  of  morality; 
no  deeply  inculcated  convictions  of  soul,  nor  any  fixcil,  general 
ideas  can  come  to  our  people  from  their  ecclesiastical  guides.  But 
the  restoration  of  a  iixed  point  of  departure,  of  a  religious  and 
moral  "place  where  to  stand,"  in  view  also  of  the  social  storms 
foretold  by  our  poli-tical  meteorologists,  is  the  only  saving  means 
by  which  a  footing  may  be  regained  by  our  generation.  Re- 
cover the  faith  in  a  last  judgment,  and  as  long  as  we  hold  this 
faith  we  may  calmly  witness  the  constant  violation  of  right  in 
the  earth,  which  is  practiced  not  merely  by  juiblic  offenders,  but 
by  legislative  boilies  and  by  judges.  For  our  sense  of  right  is 
secure  in  that  of  God,  which  he  himself  shall  one  day  avenge. 
Proceed,  liowever,  upon  the  half-truth  of  the  pantheist,  that 
"the  world's  history  is  the  world's  judgment,"  and  we  must 
secularize  our  sense  of  right ;  that  is,  we  may  recognize  no 
longer  any  law  except  that  'which  amid  constant  changes  the 
authorities  create  and  maintain.  And  by  this  fluctuating  notion 
of  right  (since  the  jns  const  it  utum  is  never  at  rest)  we  destroy 
the  majesty  of  law  in  the  minds  of  those  who  live  under  it. 


PanifieisirCs  Destruction  of  Boundaries. 

This  has  been  accomplished.     Von  Stahl  confines  absolute  riglit 
within  the  boundaries  of  our  human  economy,  and  does  not  see 
]io\v  it  has  its  primordial  rise  in  religion,  and  how  all  ethical 
right  is  rooted  in  this  rehgiuus  right  of  God  over  his  creature. 
All  this  is  the  result  of  Kant's  partially  correct  endeavor  to  in- 
terpret right  as  the  shield  of  liberty,  or  of  Fichte's  effort  to  assign 
its  rise  to  the  struggle  between  the  double  ego.     With  Ilegel, 
therefore,  it  is  put  down  as  a  morality  of  a  lower  order.    Accord- 
ing to  Ihering  it  is  born  from  an  "  end-impulse  of  society."    In 
Darwin  fashion  it  is  reconstructed  by  others  as  the  mechanical 
product  of  historic  and  external  factors  ;  while  the  later  Herbart- 
ians  perceive  it  as  the  cruse  of  oil  which  the  seaman  pours  upon 
the  seething  waves  for  the  salvation  of  ship  and  crew.     But, 
endless  as  these  representations  of  the  oi'igin  of  right  may  be, 
the  idea  is  common  to  them  all  that  it  is  only  by  the  State,  as 
the  instrument  of  society,  that  absolute  right  receives  its  sanction. 
It  is  too  bad  that,  with  the  exception  of  Von  Stahl,  none  of 
these  men  hold  to  the  immutability  of  State  authority.     The 
scepter  of  authority  is  swayed  now  by  one  party  and  again  by 
another — Napoleon  is  superseded  by  Bourbon,  Bourbon  over- 
come by  Orleans  ;  and  in  this  wise  is  formed  the  series  of  those 
who  make  themselves  master  in  turn  of  authority  in  the  State, 
because  for  a  v.-hilc  they  are  the  stronger,     lie  therefore  rules 
the  State  who  actually  gets  the  power  in  hand  ;  and  in   this 
stronger  one  who  establishes  right  and  law,  the  right  of  the 
stronger  triumphs,  not  merely  de  facto,  but  likewise  in  theory. 
And  by  this  the  boundary  falls  away  which  separates  the  au- 
thorities, as  the  powers  ordained  of  God,  from  the  people,  who, 
by  the  same  God,  are  appointed  to  be  subject  unto  them.     Both 
are  dissolved  in  the  one  all-sufficient  State.     The  State  takes 
the  place  of  God.     The  State  becomes  the  highest  power,  and 
the  fountain  head  also  of  right.     The  higher  powers  exist  no 
longer  for  the  sake  of  sin ;  but  a  State  is  the  highest  ideal  of 
human  society — a  State,  before  whose  apotheosis  every  knee 
must  bow,  by  whose  grace  alone  we  live,  and  to  whose  word  all 
must  be  subject.     And  when  in  this  wise  the  boundaries  are 
destroyed  between  the  authorities  and  the  people,  between  the 
authorities  and  Ilim  whoso  servant  they  are,  and  consequently 
between  right  as  a  divine  ordiiumce  and  right  as  a  magisterial 
command,  nothing  remains  but  the  one  single  State,  making 


Meth  odlst  lie  v  icw . 

provision  for  everything,  in  wliicli  all  liiuiian  energy  seeks  its 
ideal  develojmiont. 

A  gi-eat  danger  lui-ks  in  this ;  for,  however  eloquently  the 
boundary  has  been  reasoned  away  between  the  authorities  who 
rule  and  the  peo]>lc  who  must  obey,  that  duality  does  exist,  a 
duality  from  which  of  necessity  is  born  a  twofold  strife,  the 
strife  of  the  State  evermore  to  increase  its  power  over  the  peo- 
l>le,  and  the  strife  on  the  part  of  the  people  to  make  themselves 
masters  over  the  State.  Absolutism  from  one  side  and  anarchy 
from  the  other  stare  us  in  the  face  ;  and  the  (juestion  lias  already 
been  raised  whether  constitutional  public  law  has  not  served  its 
time,  and  whether  tlic  parliamentary  system  has  not  outlived 
its  usefulness.  The  next  step  is  to  found  upon  the  ruins  of  our 
civil  liberty  the  government  of  Schleiermachcr's  virtuosos,  that 
is,  of  those  who  are  learned  and  genial — a  repetition  of  our  old 
rcgent's-misery,  clothed  this  time  in  the  scientilic  garl). 

But  against  this,  of  course,  the  people  rebel.  The  boundaries 
have  been  destroyed  ;  why  then  longer  render  homage  to  him 
who  is  high  and  declare  those  who  arc  low  politically  under  age  ? 
Are  not  rich  and  poor  an  antithesis,  which,  since  all  boundaries 
have  been  effaced,  offensively  disturbs  your  much-lauded  har- 
mony ?  Why  I'ender  obedience,  when  authority  finds  no  more 
sujiport  in  the  conscience  and  right  is  no  longer  founded  upon 
eternal  principles?  Power  has  its  rise  in  the  State,  and  we  are 
the  people ;  we,  the  millions,  constitute  the  State ;  hence  ours 
is  the  power,  the  power  also  to  recreate  the  right,  and  we  will 
enact  that  right  in  such  a  form  as  shall  satisfy  all  our  senses. 
And  what  can  you  do,  yo  mighty  ones  of  earth,  ye  that  extol 
in  song  the  State-apotheosis,  how  oppose  this  wild  cry  of  nihil- 
ism ?  I3y  the  conscience  ?  But  that  you  have  disjointed.  ])y 
the  moral  senses?  But  these  you  have  set  afloat.  By  the  fear 
of  the  final  judgment?  At  this  you  scoff  yourselves.  By  the 
majesty  of  law  ?  This  you  have  violated.  By  the  influence  of 
the  Church  ?  This  you  have  destroyed.  Xo,  nothing,  nothing 
remains  to  you  but  your  power.  Upon  actual,  positive  power 
your  entire  building  has  been  raised.  And  with  your  j)ower 
you  may  still  offer  resistance  for  a  long  time,  for  your  forces 
are  stronger  than  ever  (and  fearful  havoc  they  may  create) ; 
but  woe  unto  you  when  in  the  end  this  poison  begins  to  work 
among  your  armies  and  as  a  cancer  feeds  upon  their  vitals.     For 


PantheisrrCs  Destruction  of  Boundaries. 

tljcii  you  are  uiidoiie.  Then  tliesc  people,  armed  by  you,  before 
thu  sun  lias  set  uj)on  that  day  of  ven<ijeaiicc  shall  with  a  siiiirle 
stroke  dispel  your  enchanting  power,  and,  while  crushing  j'ou  to 
the  earth,  proclaim  it  loud  and  far  that  boundaries  are  no  more, 
that  all  has  become  evolution,  and  that  they  but  inaugni-ate 
a  movement  which  could  not  fail  in  your  pantheistic  process! 

Max  Mlillcr  once  sketched  the  nirvayia  of  the  yoga  in  the 
picture  of  a  lamp  which  was  being  extinguished.  l\)ward  sucli 
a  social  nirvana  we  shall  see  the  nations  of  Enrope  move, 
unless  something  be  done  to  stop  the  weakening  of  boundaries. 
"VYhen,  in  the  human  body,  the  boundary  is  distnrbed  between 
the  tissue  of  the  veins  and  the  flesh  of  the  muscles,  then,  with 
an  avdyK-q  (necessity)  which  is  irresistible,  there  follows  the  de- 
composition of  the  corpse. 

France  was  not  saved  twenty  years  ago  by  the  injudicious 
supply  of  arms  to  the  mob,  nor  by  Grnnbetta's  wild  hue  and 
cry  that  not  an  inch  of  ground  nor  a  stone  of  the  stronghold 
should  be  surrendered.  No  escape  was  possible  through  the 
iron  network  with  which  Yon  Moltke  had  invested  France,  and 
in  the  old  imperial  town  of  Frankfort  the  Gaul  capitulated. 
But  this  did  not  flnish  France;  for  when,  at  length,  it  wisely 
took  copy  from  Prussia's"  example  after  the  battle  at  Jena,  and 
forcibly  restrained  its  chauvinism  and  exerted  its  utmost  efforts 
in  home  discipline  and  recovery  of  strength,  it  soon  appeared 
possessed  of  so  nnich  energy  of  national  life  that  Germany's 
emperor  already  feels  uneasy  and  has  called  out  ninety  thou- 
sand more  men  per  annum  for  the  better  protection  of  his  fron- 
tiers. Is  there  no  lesson  in  this  for  us,  when,  having  shown 
the  erasure  of  boundaries  and  the  dangers  which  it  threatens, 
we  face  the  final  question,  What  resistance  may  we  offer? 

In  sooth,  the  j^resent  condition  of  believing  Christianity  is 
very  like  that  of  France  after  Sedan  and  Gravelotte.  The 
assault  made  upon  us  has  nv)t  been  successfully  beaten  off  in 
any  single  point.  Stronghold  after  stronghold  has  been  aban- 
doned. Treaso!!  has  been  committed,  time  after  time,  within 
our  own  rardcs.  Intoxicated  with  transports  of  jo\',  the  enemy 
prophesies  the  near  dawn  of  the  day  of  our  entire  defeat.  And 
he  is  quite  correct.  "With  shame  we  must  ackn()wledge  the 
cowardliness  and  lamentable  want  of  tact  which  have  charactc!"- 
ized  our  Christian  conduct  during  these  last  hundred  years  in 


Methodist  lievieic. 

tliis  stiifu  :if(:iiii.st  unbelief.  Aiul  if  any  one  thing  is  able  to 
8tren<rtlien  our  faith  that  One  i'reater  than  we  luis  battled  for 
our  people  it  is  tlie  surprising  fact  that,  in  spite  of  such  ill- 
directed  resistance,  our  strength  has  not  waned,  but  has  grown 
intensely  stronger. 

We  have  notliing  to  say  of  the  doctrinaire.  God  be  praised  ! 
tlie  last  echoes  have  died  away  of  the  hollow  phrases  whereby 
stu[)id  self-sulKciency  deemed  itself  able  to  vanquish  a  Strauss,  to 
disarm  a  Darwin,  and  to  drive  a  Xuenen  out  of  the  fight.  These 
were  the  scoffing  bulletins  of  the  princeling  who  gathered  bul- 
lets at  Wissembourg,  the  boastful  call  of  men  utterly  ignorant 
of  the  enemy,  both  in  his  earnestness  and  in  the  strength  of 
his  weapons.  And,  as  it  always  lia])pen8  with  the  boastful 
pride  of  cowards,  of  the  ten  who  protested  then  so  loudly  per- 
haps eight  now  appear  among  the  leaders  in  infidelity.  No, 
when  we  consider  what  resistance  has  been  offered  we  refer  not 
to  that  ineffectual  skirmishing,  but  rather  to  the  earnest  three- 
fold effort  put  forth  to  save  the  threatened  ]iosition,  whereby 
men  gathered  under  the  banner  of  the  apologist,  the  compro- 
miser, or  the  amphibian. 

Apologetics  have  first  been  tried.  As  often  as  the  outworks 
were  attacked  the  defenders  of  Christian  truth  hastened  to  the 
breach  to  answer  each  shot  from  the  enemy  with  a  ball  from 
their  own  cannon.  AYliercver  the  enemy  showed  himself  they 
crept  after  him  in  trenches.  Though  often  repulsed  with  bleed- 
ing heads  they  still  held  firm,  and,  with  a  sturdy  patience 
which  compels' respect,  lance  crossed  lance,  dagger  sharpened 
dagger,  and  blow  followed  blow.  But,  in  spite  of  this  defense, 
they  gained  nothing  ;  for  on  the  heels  of  one  host  of  objections, 
winch  were  upheld  for  a  moment  at  the  most,  another  army  of 
still  heavier  critical  grievances  loomed  uj)  at  once.  Meanwhile 
they  permitted  the  enemy  to  prescribe  the  plan  of  campaign, 
fell  in  consequence  into  hopeless  confusion,  and  in  the  end 
were  cut  off  from  their  own  basis  of  operation.  The  lamen- 
table course  of  that  apologetic  resistance  is  well  known.  A  rus- 
tic militia  measured  itself  against  a  Prussian  guard.  And  henco 
the  endless  series  of  concessions,  till  at  length  the  bravest  hero 
lost  the  fire  of  his  eye  and  all  courage  from  his  weary  heart  in 
the  grief  of  disai>p(>intment. 

No  wonder,  therefore,  that,  in  view  of  this  sad  spectacle,  our 


Pantile  lam' 8  Destruction  of  Boundaries. 

Verrnittelunga-theologen  felt  tliomselves  more  attracted  by  tlio 
rule  of  the  Mittelsmann,  as  our  German  noigiil)oi'S  say.  All  too 
trustfully  our  apologists  had  entered  the  unequal  sti-ife  ;  these 
with  deeper  vision,  gentler  feeling,  and  i-ij)er  philosoph}-  cor- 
rectly saw  how  unproductive  such  clumsy  striving  must  be, 
and,  therefore,  peace-loving  as  they  were  by  nature,  they  rather 
employed  a  spiritual  polity.  So  they  entered  the  field  j)receded 
by  the  white  flag  of  truce,  and,  as  the  enemy  drew  near,  ordered 
the  trumpeter  to  blow  o.  j^ax  vobiscum^  and  readily  assured  the 
men  of  modern  views  of  their  warm  sympathy  with  their  mo- 
dernity and  of  their  deep  dislike  for  the  old  school ;  yes,  that 
they  would  like  nothing  better  than  the  honor  of  marching  with 
these  moderns,  if  only  the  name  of  Christ  could  be  embroidered 
on  the  banner  and  the  cross  ornament  the  top  of  their  standard. 
And  the  success  of  their  polity  was  naturally  brilliant.  "Mod- 
ern-orthodox," a  genuine  pantheistic  comjiound,  was  the  adopted 
name  of  the  new  auxilinr3\  And  we  behohl  the  hemes  who 
were  to  rescue  oiir  faith  d)  service  as  sappers,  chai-ged  with 
the  clearing  away  of  "  orthodox  obstacles," 

However  (whether  under  the  influence  of  De  Genestet  who 
shall  say?),  the  compromise  method  soon  ceased  to  enchant; 
and  then,  at  lengtli,  we  beheld  how  men  gathered  under  the 
shield  of  the  amphibian.  Jacobi  had  been  a  heretic  in  his 
intellect,  but  a  believer  at  heart.  If,  then,  this  dualism  in  feel- 
ing of  Jacobi  were  supported  by  the  philosophic  monism  of 
Ilerbart  and  by  the  Erhenntnisztlieorie  of  Lotze,  how  safe  the 
position  would  be,  how  easy  would  be  their  movements,  and 
liow  freely  would  they  hunt  with  criticism  to  their  very  hearts' 
content,  and  still  engage  in  praj-er  with  the  pious  wife  !  That 
was  it.  Head  and  heart,  the  intellect  and  the  will,  must  be 
divorced;  Werth-xirtheil  was  the  magic  motto  which  would  save 
from  every  dilemma.  And  thus  arose  that  generation  of  spir- 
itual amphibians  who  plunged  so  playfully  into  the  depths  of 
the  modern  waters,  and  again  would  nimbly  scale  the  river-bank 
to  graze  in  the  sweet  clover  of  tlie  hallowed  Christian  pasture. 
But  there  was  no  defense  in  this.  A  dualism  of  principles  gives 
no  system.  And,  moreover,  our  Christianity  is  a  revealed,  his- 
toric religion,  which  at  every  point  of  the  way  inexorably  faces 
us  with  ideas  which  demajid  analysis  and  with  facts  which  must 
find  room  in  our  cosmos. 


Methodist  Revieio. 

However  Iiif^lih',  therefore,  we  appreciate  the  intention  of 
these  three  classes  of  defeiulers,  and  however  much  we  owe  to 
their  study  of  detail,  we  cannot  be  incorporate  with  them — not 
with  tlie  apolo^etes,  because  no  plea  can  avail  when  reason  is 
l)oth  defenthint  and  judge;  not  with  tlie  Mittelsmannc)\  be- 
c.iuse  they  exiiaust  tiieir  strength  in  a  monstrous  marriage, 
and  "  hyi)rids  do  not  propagate;"  and  not  with  our  spiritual 
dualists,  because  logic  and  ethics  have  but  one  consciousness 
at  their  connnand,  and  all  such  spiritual  divorces  must  end  in 
iiyiK'rtrophy  of  the  head  coupled  with  atrophy  of  the  heart. 

An  altogether  dilfei'ent  and  much  safer  method  was  employed 
wherever  resistance  proved  effectual.  God  calls  Abraham  out 
of  Ur,  separates  Israel  from  the  nations,  and  thus,  in  real  life, 
casts  up  a  dam  against  the  flood  of  j)aganism.  Christ  conies 
and  forms  in  Israel  a  following  of  his  own,  which,  by  separa- 
tion from  the  world,  is  being  trained  to  vanquish  the  spirit  of 
the  World.  In  the  sixteenth  century  similar  resistance  was 
offered  by  men  who  witiidrew  their  forces  within  self-created 
bounds  to  regain  strength,  in  order,  by  life's  reality  and  deeds, 
and  not  by  theories  and  phrases,  to  strengthen  themselves  for 
the  strife  which  awaited  them.  In  the  self-same  maimer  You 
iStein  rallied  Prussia  after  Jena  and  France  has  restored  her 
strength.  And,  as  regards  our  sti-uggle,  they  who  adhere  to  the 
Christian  faith  and  appreciate  the  danger  of  the  destruction  of 
boundaries  must  begin  by  drawing  a  circle  about  themselves 
within  which  to  develop  a  life  of  their  own,  of  which  life,  thus 
constituted,  they  nni;;t  give  account,  and  so  to  increase  strength 
for  the  strife  wiiich  is  upon  us. 

This  is  the  only  method  which,  as  often  as  correctly  applied,  has 
stood  the  test  of  fire,  which  Rome  never  abandoned,  and  which 
is  the  only  rational  one  again  to  pursue.  IIow  have  pantheism 
and  ev(»lution  risen  to  be  so  powerful  \  Certainly  not  because 
of  Kant  or  Hegel,  Darwin  or  Haeckel,  for  no  single  man  can 
transform  the  spirit  of  his  time  if  he  be  not  himself  a  child  of 
his  time.  Xo,  the  general  mood  of  mind,  the  teinj)er  of  soul, 
the  inclination  of  heart,  all  of  life  down  to  its  deepest  impulses, 
had  risen  up  in  rebellion  at  the  close  of  the  last  cetitury  against 
the  boundaries  appointed  l)y  God;  pantheism  was  in  the  air; 
and  Hegel  and  Darwin,  as  children  of  their  age,  only  hastened 
the  birth  of  the  monstrosity,  which  our  age  had  long  carried 


Pantheism's  Destrxiction  of  Boundaries. 

under  its  lieart.  There  is  no  need,  therefore,  to  exhaust  our' 
strength  in  a  conflict  of  words.  So  powerful  a  movement  of 
life  can  be  faced  with  hope  of  success  only  by  the  movement 
of  an  antithetic  life.  In  opposition  to  those  who  efface  the 
boundaries  both  in  life  and  consciousness  a  life  nmst  be  devel- 
oped with  deeply  marked  chai-acter  lines ;  the  floating  fogs  of 
pantheism  must  be  confronted  with  the  clear  and  positive  ut- 
terances of  a  truly  embraced  confession;  and  in  like  manner 
the  exaltation  of  the  world's  dictum  must  be  opposed  by  the 
absolute  authority  of  the  Scriptures.  Thus  an  indei»endent 
basis  of  operation  will  be  regained  and  a  reality  will  originate 
which  already  as  such  exercises  an  influence  upon  our  inspiration. 
Thus  only  will  a  fortified  line  present  itself  at  the  front  which 
will  render  it  possible  to  postjjone  a  giving  of  battle  until 
quietly  and  definitely  the  forces  are  dcTcloped,  the  weapons 
sharpened,  and  the  ranks  well  exercised.  Thus  also  is  revived 
that  holy  comradeship,  tliat  confidence  in  one's  own  cause,  and 
that  enthusiasm  for  the  colors  of  the  baiinoi-  which  double  the 
strength  of  every  army. 

That  this  system  demands  great  sacrifice  is  not  denied.  It  com- 
pels an  entire  break  with  much  that  is  attractive.  It  cuts  off  all 
intercourse  with  the  nobler  heathen,  however  fascinating  that 
may  be.  A  great  ])rice  must  l)e  paid  for  it ;  and,  worse  yet,  it 
will  cause  the  resolute  man  all  manner  of  family  inconvenience, 
and  will  render  it  difiicult  to  find  a  position  in  life  for  the  sup- 
port of  oneself  and  family.  But  with  the  Scriptures  in  hand  we 
declare  that  this  sacrifice  must  be  laid  on  the  altar.  "  lie  that 
loveth  father  or  mother  more  than  me  is  not  worthy  of  me." 
Christ  came  not  to  bring  peace  in  a  pantheistic  sense,  but  to 
malie  discord  among  men,  that  is,  to  establish  a  boundary  which 
none  can  remove  between  those  who  touch  the  hem  of  his  gar- 
ment and  those  who  reject  him.  And  therefore  this  system 
must  not  be  accused  of  exclusivism.  Of  this  they  are  guilty 
who  on  their  own  responsibility  establish  a  false  boundary  that 
separates  things  which  belong  together.  But  this  reproach  will 
never  touch  the  system  we  commend,  for  at  the  very  point 
where  the  boundary  is  drawn  by  our  deepest  conviction  of  life 
the  pigeonhole  system  lies  condemned,  and  broken  down  is  every 
false  wall  of  separation.  This  system  has  as  little  in  common 
with  the   recluse  who  shuns   the  liijht  of  the  ont^^ide  world. 


Methodist  Review. 

Living  in  u  house  of  one's  own  by  no  means  forbids  :i  going 
abroad  in  every  pathway  of  life.  And,  as  we  said  abo\-c,  Ixjhind 
our  line  we  desire  to  arm  ourselves  more  completely  that  we 
may  be  the  better  ready  for  the  strife. 

Of  one  claim,  we  grant,  we  can  make  no  surrender;  it 
must  be  born  within  us — that  we  believe.  Even  as  wc  are 
stabbed  by  those  who  announce  themselves  as  the  enlight- 
ened and  the  civilized  and  label  us  as  the  '*  nonthinking  part  of 
the  nation,"  so  they  must  suffer  us  to  wound  them  as  often  as 
we  distinguish  ourselves  as  "  believers"  from  the  "  nonbelieving 
])art  of  the  nation."  But  this  is  the  verj'  thing  in  question. 
It  is  the  protection  of  that  boundary  for  which  wo  stake  our  very 
life.  They  deny  the  fall  by  sin  ;  for  us  it  stands  firm  and  lixed. 
And  therefore  they  cannot  recognize  a  bou?idary  which  is  estal> 
lished  by  the  entrance  of  grace,  while  for  us  this  transition  is 
one  from  death  unto  life. 

We  are  taught  by  the  word  of  Gud  that  sin  not  merely 
spoiled  the  will  and  corrupted  our  nature,  but  that  it  also  dark- 
ened the  understanding.  On  the  contrary,  the  palingenesis  not 
merely  renews  the  will  and  transforms  our  nature,  but  also  sheds 
a  light  of  its  own  into  our  inner  consciousness.  lie  who  believes 
receives  not  merely  another  impression  of  life,  but  is  also  dif- 
ferently affected  in  the  world  of  thought,  which  difference 
cannot  be  better  interpreted  than  by  Augustine's  celebrated 
hiterrogatoriiim.  Augustine  had  himself  been  a  pantheist  at 
first,  and  had  not  been  able  to  conceive  God  otherwise  than  as 
hiding  in  the-  vXt].  But  when,  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  he 
turned  away  from  tiie  Jesus  patihilis  of  the  Manichaians  and 
lixed  his  gaze  nj)on  the  Man  of  sorrows,  then,  with  the  self-same 
ears  with  which  he  had  heard  the  sound  of  the  jiarticles  of  light 
in  leaf  and  stem,  he  now  heard  this  entirely  different  speech  of 
the  creation.     Then,  as  he  wi-ites  in  his  Confessions, 

I  asked  the  eartli,  and  it  answered,  "I  am  imt  lb-;"  and  wliat- 
soever  arc  tlK-rein  made  the  sanii'  ronfc-ssion.  I  asked  the  sea  and 
the  deeps  and  llie  creepint,'  things  tliat  live<l,  and  they  replied, 
"  We  are  not  thy  (iod;  seek  liii^Iier  than  we."  I  asked  the  breezy 
air,  and  tlie  universal  air  witli  its  inhabitants  answered,  "  Anax- 
inienes  was  deceived;  we  are  not  tliy  (itiil."  I  asked  the  heavens, 
the  sun,  nioon,  and  stars;  "  Neither,"  said  llu-y,  "  are  we  the  God 
wlioni  thou  si'ckest."  And  I  answered  uiit()  all  thiuLTs  which  stand 
about  the  door  of  my  Hesh,  "  Ye  have  told  me  concerning  my  God 


Pantheism" s  Dt'stnictlon  of  Boundarks. 

that  ye  are  not  he;  tell  me  somethinj^  about  liiiu."  Ami  wiih  a 
loud  voice  they  exclaimed,  "It  is  lie  who  hath  made  us!  " 

In  the  grandeur  of  the  faith  Augustiuu  was  now  another 
man,  and  therefore  lie  heard  differentlv  and  tlioii<rht  dilYer- 
ently.  Then  also  he  heard  the  voice  of  God  addressing  him 
in  the  Scriptures ;  and  our  circle  holds  this  in  common  with 
Monica's  great  son.  "We  also  bow  ourselves  before  that  Word  ; 
and  therefore  that  Woixl  also  draws  the  boundary  line  between 
us  who  camp  behind  our  line  and  tliose  who  live  beyond  it. 
AYc  are  often  told  that  w^e  cannot  hold  this  opinion  in  sincerity  ; 
the  pious  housewife  may,  but  not  the  man  of  science.  And  he 
M-ho  throws  away  his  respect  exclaims,  "Ye  are  deceivers!" 
Of  course,  they  who  are  not  stupid  must  agree  with  such  wis- 
dom or  else  have  their  integrity  suspected.  We  are  familiar  with 
such  ways.  But  this  much  must  be  granted  :  faitli  in  tl)e  Scrip- 
tures can  never  be  the  result  of  criticism,  for  then  no  one  could 
ever  have  believed,  as  criticism  is  not  yet  a  finished  science. 
Moreover,  how  could  the  Scriptui-es  ever  excite  faith  among 
the  humble  laity  who  understand  nothing  of  criticism  ?  If  then 
it  is  very  true  that  in  the  Scriptures  there  arise  many  ditiiculties 
and  objections  which  have  by  no  means  been  straightened  out, 
this  does  not  delay  us,  this  does  not  trouljle  us,  since  we  stand 
on  other  ground.  In  170-i  it  was  Kant  himself  Avho  denounced 
^'' die  Keckheit  der  Kraftgenies^'' yA\\Q\x  deemed  itself  to  have 
outgrown  this  norm  of  faith,  and  added  these  weighty  words : 

If  ever  the  Scriptures  which  we  now  have  should  lose  their 
authority,  a  similar  authority  could  never  more  arise,  for  a  mir- 
acle like  that  of  the  Scripture  authorit}^  caimot  repeat  itself,  simp!  v 
because  the  loss  of  the  faith  i.i  the  Scriptures  which  was  mi'.in- 
tained  for  so  many  centuries  would  render  faith  impossible  in  any 
new  authority. 

And  the  deep  significance  of  these  words  was  felt  by  us  yeai's 
ago  when  first  we  read  them.  In  the  Scriptures  we  have  a 
cedar  of  spiritual  authority  which  for  eighteen  centuries  has 
been  putting  forth  its  roots  in  the  life-soil  of  our  hununi  con- 
sciousness;  and  beneath  its  shadow  the  religious  and  nioi-al  life 
of  humanity  have  increased  inconceivably  in  worth  and  merit. 
Now  hew  this  cedar  down,  and  for  a  little  while  green 
leaves  wnll  still  appear  upon  its  downcast  trunk;  but  who  will 
give  another  cedar  for  the  children  of  our  people?  who  guar- 

51 KIKTU  SEUIES,  VOL.    I.X. 


Jldhotliat  licview. 

autcc  ;i  shade  like  unto  this?  This  is  why  we  have  bowed  be- 
fore these  Scri};tures  with  tlie  uiialfeeted  sim])Hcity  of  the  little 
child,  in  simple  faith,  and  not  as  a  result  of  learning  ;  iov  this 
we  have  zealously  defended  these  Scriptures,  and  now  rejoice 
in  our  soul  as  we  render  thanks  unto  God  for  seeing  a  new 
increase  of  faith  in  these  Holy  Scripture.'?.  You  know  we  are 
not  conservative,  but  this  is  our  conservatism  :  we  seek  to  eave 
the  foliage  of  this  cedar  for  our  ])eople,  lest  shortly  they  should 
ho  without  a  covering  in  a  barren,  scorching  desert.  As  our 
Saviour  believed  in  Moses  and  the  prophets,  so  we  desire  to 
believe  in  the  Sci'iptures.  For  he  who  in  this  matter  of  the 
Sciiptures  accuses  Christ  of  error  attacks  thereby  the  mystery 
itself  upon  which  is  founded  the  whole  Church  of  Chiist,  deny- 
ing that  he  should  be  our  Lord  and  also  our  God. 

''  Isolation  is  your  strength."  This  is  the  golden  motto  Groen 
van  Prinsteren  becpieathed  to  the  isi<u8  de  Caloin.  AVhat  we 
have  said  is  plea  for  this  significant  device.  And  is  anyone 
afraid  lest,  uiuler  this  motto  and  by  this  system,  poetry  be  sac- 
rificed to  pantheism  and  the  unity  of  the  cosmos  to  evolution? 
Then  listen  liow  from  the  tents  of  the  saints  throughout  the 
earth  there  arises  one  voice,  which  gathers  everything  that  lives, 
and  breathes,  and  thinks,  and  does  not  think  into  an  entirely 
different  unity,  namely,  the  unity  of  praise;  as  the  ancient 
player  on  the  harp  sings  of  a  God  who  "  has  established  an 
order  for  his  creatures  which  they  cannot  transgress,"  so  that, 
with  the  sound  of  cymbals,  all,  all  may  sing  in  unison  : 

Praiso  Ilim.  yo  heavens,  and  yo  waters  that  be  above  the  heavens; 

Praise  the  Lord,  yo  eartli,  yo  drajroiis  and  all  deeps. 

Praiso  him,  yo  mountains  and  all  hills,  yo  beasts  and  all  caitle, 

Ye  fruitful  trees  and  all  cedars,  yo  kinps  of  the  earth  and  all  people, 

Botli  yoiuii;  men  and  maidens,  yo  old  men  and  children; 

Lot  all  praiso  the  numo  of  tho  Lord. 

For  he  hath  exaiterl  the  horn  of  his  people, 

Tho  praiso  of  ail  his  saints,  a  peopjo  near  nnm  him. 


Ml 


